Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

A liberal tells it like it is (a gay at that)

topdawgnc
topdawgnc Member Posts: 7,842
businessinsider.com/apple-eu-tax-ruling-profound-harmful-effect-investment-job-creation-2016-8

Amazing how the tone changes when other people's money becomes your own.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

~Margaret Thatcher
«13

Comments

  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Huh?

    Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production;[10] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.[11] Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership; to citizen ownership of equity; or to any combination of these.[12] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]

    Socialist economic systems can be divided into both non-market and market forms.[16] Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets and money with engineering and technical criteria based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system.[25] By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive with respect to the operation of socially-owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend.[26][27][28] The feasibility and exact methods of resource allocation and calculation for a socialist system are the subjects of the socialist calculation debate.
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    You simply couldn't hold back could you
  • PurpleThrobber
    PurpleThrobber Member Posts: 48,965 Standard Supporter
    edited August 2016
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 38,900 Standard Supporter
    edited August 2016
    2001400ex said:

    Huh?

    Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production;[10] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.[11] Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership; to citizen ownership of equity; or to any combination of these.[12] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]

    Socialist economic systems can be divided into both non-market and market forms.[16] Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets and money with engineering and technical criteria based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system.[25] By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive with respect to the operation of socially-owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend.[26][27][28] The feasibility and exact methods of resource allocation and calculation for a socialist system are the subjects of the socialist calculation debate.

    ROFL what socialist country had democratic control of trhe means of production? Russia? China? N. Korea?

    They have a little democratic vote on who goes to the death camps? Who gets shot in the back of the head etc?

    Socialist's suck, they'll always suck. it doesn't work and it's fundamentally wrong.

  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Huh?

    Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production;[10] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.[11] Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership; to citizen ownership of equity; or to any combination of these.[12] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]

    Socialist economic systems can be divided into both non-market and market forms.[16] Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets and money with engineering and technical criteria based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system.[25] By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive with respect to the operation of socially-owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend.[26][27][28] The feasibility and exact methods of resource allocation and calculation for a socialist system are the subjects of the socialist calculation debate.

    ROFL what socialist country had democratic control of trhe means of production? Russia? China? N. Korea?

    They have a little democratic vote on who goes to the death camps? Who gets shot in the back of the head etc?

    Socialist's suck, they'll always suck. it doesn't work and it's fundamentally wrong.

    Learn the difference between socialism and communism.

    Not to mention, no one disagrees that socialists suck. No one is actually proposing socialism in the US.

    But how are you fucktarded?
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 38,900 Standard Supporter
    edited August 2016
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Huh?

    Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production;[10] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.[11] Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership; to citizen ownership of equity; or to any combination of these.[12] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]

    Socialist economic systems can be divided into both non-market and market forms.[16] Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets and money with engineering and technical criteria based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system.[25] By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive with respect to the operation of socially-owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend.[26][27][28] The feasibility and exact methods of resource allocation and calculation for a socialist system are the subjects of the socialist calculation debate.

    ROFL what socialist country had democratic control of trhe means of production? Russia? China? N. Korea?

    They have a little democratic vote on who goes to the death camps? Who gets shot in the back of the head etc?

    Socialist's suck, they'll always suck. it doesn't work and it's fundamentally wrong.

    Learn the difference between socialism and communism.

    Not to mention, no one disagrees that socialists suck. No one is actually proposing socialism in the US.

    But how are you fucktarded?
    Really didn't a guy named Bernie claiming to be a socialist get cheated out of the democratic nomination? He wanted to take money from working people and give it to lazy people. So no one is actually proposing socialism?

    Socialism and communism are alike in that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership of the means of production and centralized planning. Socialism grows directly out of capitalism; it is the first form of the new society. Communism is a further development or "higher stage" of socialism.

    Guess you don't get it.

    Talk about fucktarded.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    2001400ex said:

    Huh?

    Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production;[10] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.[11] Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership; to citizen ownership of equity; or to any combination of these.[12] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]

    Socialist economic systems can be divided into both non-market and market forms.[16] Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets and money with engineering and technical criteria based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system.[25] By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive with respect to the operation of socially-owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend.[26][27][28] The feasibility and exact methods of resource allocation and calculation for a socialist system are the subjects of the socialist calculation debate.

    ROFL what socialist country had democratic control of trhe means of production? Russia? China? N. Korea?

    They have a little democratic vote on who goes to the death camps? Who gets shot in the back of the head etc?

    Socialist's suck, they'll always suck. it doesn't work and it's fundamentally wrong.

    Learn the difference between socialism and communism.

    Not to mention, no one disagrees that socialists suck. No one is actually proposing socialism in the US.

    But how are you fucktarded?
    Really didn't a guy named Bernie claiming to be a socialist get cheated out of the democratic nomination? He wanted to take money from working people and give it to lazy people. So no one is actually proposing socialism?

    Socialism and communism are alike in that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership of the means of production and centralized planning. Socialism grows directly out of capitalism; it is the first form of the new society. Communism is a further development or "higher stage" of socialism.

    Guess you don't get it.

    Talk about fucktarded.
    Bernie was proposing a fucked up version of social distribution of wealth. Not socialism. The key to both socialism and communism is government ownership of production. Which Bernie was not proposing and pretty much everyone agrees that government ownership of production is fucktarded.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,056 Standard Supporter
    edited August 2016
    So, Bernie was just proposing that working people pay higher taxes to feed the able-bodied guys holding signs at the freeway off-ramps and residents of the Jungle. And free college for more dumb kids who don't belong there, to do sit-ins, campouts, and traffic-blocking protests instead of going to classes they're failing. Is that about it for Bernie's platform?
    I liked Bernie until his capitulation to BLM thugs and his college-for-all proposal. That's when I realized he was a senile old fool.