Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?
Comments
-
1. I don't think you know what socialism is
2. No -
too bad governments trying to reduce poverty have gone Owen 122001400ex said:I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.
-
Sweden isn't socialist.PurpleThrobber said:I'm down with socialism as long as all the gals look like Swedish chicks.
-
did anyone but a handful of people responding to a persons video actually complain about the cup? Seems like there is 1000000000.81% more people complaining about the people complaining than the people who actually complained.dhdawg said:
Complaining about the Starbucks cup is dumb. But that is what they actually believe in and in the end it hurts them politically. The left convincing people there is a "war on women" is meant solely to get votes. That's the difference2001400ex said:
You say that as if liberals have a monopoly on screaming about offending people. What do you think about the Starbucks cup?PurpleJ said:
Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.2001400ex said:I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.
-
It's nice to have Damone back.
-
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still. -
Fuck free market socialism. Communist capitalism is the way to go.
-
I still like Swedish chicks. And their boobs. I like their boobs a lot.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Sweden isn't socialist.PurpleThrobber said:I'm down with socialism as long as all the gals look like Swedish chicks.
-
Who cares if we go to socialism. The sun will engulf the Earth anyway.
Plus, it's a throw away year for the economy. -
No. Fascism is when the government gives large corporations monopolies in their sectors. That would be the opposite of free market.sarktastic said:
"free market socialism" is this what they're calling fascism these days?OZONE said:
This is why I think free market socialism is the future, not pure socialism.salemcoog said:
You're speaking of Utopia. The only way Utopia works is if everybody gets what they need.OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
The whole monkey in that wrench is that Human nature is to take what they want. Damn their neighbors needs. And Especially if there's not enough to go around. Not everyone is that way. But more are than aren't. Especially if they haven't had it before. There are many civilizations still that aren't that way. But they are the ones that are still self sufficient.
There is still latitude for greater reward for hard work, you just wouldn't see the wealth gaps you see in the US... it would be much more like the wealth gaps you see in Sweden or Denmark.
-
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
I'm pretty sure that just went over everyone's head on this bored.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
Pretty sure the bored rolled their eyes at the idiot2001400ex said:
I'm pretty sure that just went over everyone's head on this bored.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople -
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople
-
Obviously not good enough breakthroughs, I meant game changers.
-
You just made my point.RaceBannon said:
Pretty sure the bored rolled their eyes at the idiot2001400ex said:
I'm pretty sure that just went over everyone's head on this bored.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it.
Huh? Please show an example where a liberal is opposed to food production breakthroughs. Of course, if your definition of "breakthrough" is a food production economy that requires oil for everything from fertilizers to pesticides... and poisons are allowed through the food chain... then your argument has failed before it began.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople -
I like indefinable philosophical social goals that give an emotional warm and fuzzy.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
too bad governments trying to reduce poverty have gone Owen 122001400ex said:I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.
-
We could just grow all the food we can with hand sewn heirloom seeds and tell the rest of the world... and much of America...to fuck off when it doesn't go around.OZONE said:OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it.
Huh? Please show an example where a liberal is opposed to food production breakthroughs. Of course, if your definition of "breakthrough" is a food production economy that requires oil for everything from fertilizers to pesticides... and poisons are allowed through the food chain... then your argument has failed before it began.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople -
You mean like how private enterprise mines and oil wells are on BLM and USFS properties and pay royalties to the government for the riches they extract?OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
Similar to that yes, but applied more broadly (as I mentioned in my lumber example), and the oil companies would be charged higher rents and their CEOs would be imprisoned if they spilled any oil. And lots of taxes.PurpleThrobber said:
You mean like how private enterprise mines and oil wells are on BLM and USFS properties and pay royalties to the government for the riches they extract?OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place. -
OZONE said:OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it.
Huh? Please show an example where a liberal is opposed to food production breakthroughs. Of course, if your definition of "breakthrough" is a food production economy that requires oil for everything from fertilizers to pesticides... and poisons are allowed through the food chain... then your argument has failed before it began.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople
You've proven my point.
My God you're an idiot. But we knew that.
Think man. -
Great substance to your point. Fits in with your track record.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:OZONE said:OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it.
Huh? Please show an example where a liberal is opposed to food production breakthroughs. Of course, if your definition of "breakthrough" is a food production economy that requires oil for everything from fertilizers to pesticides... and poisons are allowed through the food chain... then your argument has failed before it began.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
We've had breakthroughs in food production and the libtards are apeshit pissed.PurpleReign said:A hybrid system is almost certainly the future. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster version of a capitalist economy and a socialist welfare state.
I don't see people and/or corporations giving up their property without a fight and at the same time the natural evolution of technology is going to erode a lot of jobs.
Maybe we will have essential breakthroughs in food production and energy storage that will save the day, but I still don't see how you deal with an exploding population and no jobs without some sort of basic handout system to simply keep people alive. Unless letting them slowly starve and die by the millions is acceptable, of course.
It's a lot of mouths to feed.
#SoylentGreenIsPeople
You've proven my point.
My God you're an idiot. But we knew that.
Think man. -
Hey, the Creep still gets (not gives) anal on the side, even though Mrs. Creep has always, does, and will likely always, say, "Not there. I don't do that" when he tries to slip one in.PurpleJ said:
Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.2001400ex said:I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.
So, really, I don't give no fuck about women's rights as long as I get what I want. -
Eh. Instead of reading the Cliffnotes of Das Kapital, The German Ideology, or A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, you should read the entirety of each book.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place.
Then, and only then, can you throw around terms like "means of production" on a message bored on which I have taken up residence.
Axe the locals. I can throw down on this shit like a mother fucker. I took a shit last week that knows more about this topic than you do. Why do you think Damone left? Because I threw his ass outta here that's why.
Good job spelling "Weyerhaeuser" though; it is a tough one. I'm impressed. -
*wherehousercreepycoug said:
Eh. Instead of reading the Cliffnotes of Das Kapital, The German Ideology, or A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, you should read the entirety of each book.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place.
Then, and only then, can you throw around terms like "means of production" on a message bored on which I have taken up residence.
Axe the locals. I can throw down on this shit like a mother fucker. I took a shit last week that knows more about this topic than you do. Why do you think Damone left? Because I threw his ass outta here that's why.
Good job spelling "Weyerhaeuser" though; it is a tough one. I'm impressed.
*Your welcome. -
PurpleThrobber said:
*whorehousercreepycoug said:
Eh. Instead of reading the Cliffnotes of Das Kapital, The German Ideology, or A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, you should read the entirety of each book.OZONE said:
The markets are free, but more of the means of production, such as land, are owned by the society. Individuals or companies can rent it as part of their business plan.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
Free market socialism? What the fuck is that?OZONE said:"Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?"
Not pure socialism, no; it has the same flaws as pure capitalism. But some kind of free market socialism, or democratic socialism, yes I think it is where we are headed, but it will be a couple of generations away still.
For example, instead of Weyerhaeuser owning millions of acres of land, the land would be owned by the people, and Weyerhaeuser would pay to harvest trees from it.
Gets tricker when you are talking about intellectual capital (rather than land), and of course the various types of capital in between. Progressive economists have a model for it. Probably shorter periods for copyrights and patents.
Of course, a healthy tax structure is in place.
Then, and only then, can you throw around terms like "means of production" on a message bored on which I have taken up residence.
Axe the locals. I can throw down on this shit like a mother fucker. I took a shit last week that knows more about this topic than you do. Why do you think Damone left? Because I threw his ass outta here that's why.
Good job spelling "Weyerhaeuser" though; it is a tough one. I'm impressed.
*Your welcome. -
The story of the railroads and the timber industry and the land of the great west in America is an interesting one. Today a lot of that land is housing developments built by whorehouser spin offs as well as other timber giants.
The people of this country have been paid several times for that initial investment of land and got the engine for the greatest economic engine in history. And Stanford University.
And still some who lived off the fat of that land want to whine and bitch and complain. go figure -
I like to be the 5th vote that buries a poast, that's what I like to do.2001400ex said:I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.
You must have been dropped on your head as a child. It's the only explanation.
