New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

If Trump is impeached

What will make Roberts “unfair” and “pathetic”?

  • Bush appointed him

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Gay

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Russian-collusion Roberts

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Chief injustice

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Already ruled against him a bunch of times

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Qpizzaghazi

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Not very smart

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    3

EatTheRich

President
And yet you STILL advocate for a system where the government employees who made those terrible decisions are put in charge of EVERYTHING.
The “terrible decisions” were to put state assets in private hands. I am advocating against allowing private ownership of large amounts of land or fixed capital investments.
 
The “terrible decisions” were to put state assets in private hands. I am advocating against allowing private ownership of large amounts of land or fixed capital investments.
Right, which is why I mock you for wanting those fools to be in charge of everything.
 

EatTheRich

President
You just said and gave no concrete examples. I gave the justification of public utilities and eminent domain issues that facilitate. What you could have used is public funding of stadiums. ha ha
As a review of the thread would prove, I gave several concrete examples. Your “refutation” of my contention that capitalism requires theft to be workable was that the thefts I detailed were necessary for the viability of capitalism.

The proof is in the counter examples.

China had to become more capitalist to remain nominatively communist.
No. The capitalist-minded political heirs of Mao finally succeeded after decades of trying in imposing historic defeats on the working class and overturning China’s socialist revolution.

Venezuela was more successful until Chavez showed up and pissed it all away.
Unless you count the mass starvation and homelessness. Anyway, Chavez was a leftist but not a socialist.

"Rich as an Argentine," until leftist policies deconstruct what well regulated capitalism built.
Argentina fell behind in the capitalist rat race under the mostly conservative governments of the late 1800s, mostly due to Chilean and American competition and not to domestic policy. “Rich as an Argentine” is not something anyone ever said.

And of course the U.S. since before Lincoln. Just ask Alexis de Tocqueville.
When capitalism was a progressive alternative to feudalism, and the most left-wing viable alternative anywhere in the world, it outdid the modes of production associated with more reactionary alternatives, just as when socialism came on the scene it began to outdo capitalism.


Communists and Nazis promised a welfare state for the workers
Not true. The welfare state is a feature of capitalism, which the Nazis inherited and maintained, while the Communists replaces it with meaningful, rewarding work for the masses.

they both nationalized industries
Absolutely untrue. The Nazis engaged in wholesale privatization; in fact, the term “privatization” was invented by an admiring observer to describe the centerpiece of the Nazis’ economic program.

and they both exerted command over the economy
As does any modern government, of necessity. There is nothing distinctive abo it their doing so as well.

Those are the elements of socialism of commune prerogatives over the individual's prerogative.
You mean like exercising eminent domain to build industries at the expense of every individual not a stockholder in those industries? Communists protect the interests of a majority of individuals at the expense of a minority who are kept from exercising the privilege of exploiting them; capitalists protect the interests of a minority of individuals by sacrificing the interests of everyone else to them. Anyway, as I said the welfare state is unique to capitalist society, nationalization (a necessary but not a sufficient condition for socialism) was antithetical to the Nazi program, and the command economy is a universal feature of the modern era without which capitalism as we know it could function no more than socialism.

Communist leftist evil = Nazi leftist evil
The Nazis were right-wing by their own self-designation, according to all their admirers past and present including the Conservative party that joined Hitler’s coalition government, according to their seating in the Reichstag, and according to their policies.

The only economic success Communism (and Nazism for that matter) offers is to that of its elites. The workers fry and die for both brands of socialism.
Interesting that your criticism of communism is that it works like capitalism. Meanwhile the improvement in the standard of living in every workers’ state and the masses’ determined fight to defend socialism against enemies foreign and domestic says otherwise.
 
As a review of the thread would prove, I gave several concrete examples. Your “refutation” of my contention that capitalism requires theft to be workable was that the thefts I detailed were necessary for the viability of capitalism.
Name the case sudies with company names and indicating transfer of capital investment gratis to that company.
 

EatTheRich

President
Name the case sudies with company names and indicating transfer of capital investment gratis to that company.
Giveaways of public land (yours and mine) to railroads: Union Pacific, Northern Pacific, Central Pacific ...

Giveaways of nuclear power plants developed at public expense by government employees to private interests: General Electric, Duke, Westinghouse
 
Giveaways of public land (yours and mine) to railroads: Union Pacific, Northern Pacific, Central Pacific ...
WE need the railroads. We got/get cheap transport for goods with the railroads. Without them WE would be fvcked. WE can invest in those railroads so that their financial gain is OUR gain. Public lands were not only given away to railroads they were given away to settlers. This point of your is simply dumb.
Giveaways of nuclear power plants developed at public expense by government employees to private interests: General Electric, Duke, Westinghouse
Didn't happen. GE, Duke, Westinghouse build nuclear power plants not run them for profit, Which by the way you too can do by investing in utilities. You need to stop turning reality on its head.
 

EatTheRich

President
WE need the railroads. We got/get cheap transport for goods with the railroads. Without them WE would be fvcked. WE can invest in those railroads so that their financial gain is OUR gain. Public lands were not only given away to railroads they were given away to settlers. This point of your is simply dumb.

Didn't happen. GE, Duke, Westinghouse build nuclear power plants not run them for profit, Which by the way you too can do by investing in utilities. You need to stop turning reality on its head.
Those plants were built by the government using technology developed by the government, and given away to the energy companies that have made obscene profits from them.

We need the railroads, not the parasitical railroad owners. So let’s nationalize them and run them as a public utility under union management. Like the rest of the transportation, communications, and energy sectors.
 
Those plants were built by the government using technology developed by the government, and given away to the energy companies that have made obscene profits from them.
I think the government paid for all the parts and manufacturing done for those first plants by the likes of Westinghouse and at most assembled those parts. But feel free to prove to me otherwise. Show me that those nukes weren't developed along the lines of the F-35. Nothing wrong with profits if you invest in companies making them.

We need the railroads, not the parasitical railroad owners. So let’s nationalize them and run them as a public utility under union management. Like the rest of the transportation, communications, and energy sectors.
The only parasite are Communists who want to usurp the capitalist elites with communist elites and putting not some people but ALL people in economic misery. NO THANK YOU!!!

The unions can buy controlling shares in Union Pacific if they want to run it!
 

EatTheRich

President
I think the government paid for all the parts and manufacturing done for those first plants by the likes of Westinghouse and at most assembled those parts. But feel free to prove to me otherwise. Show me that those nukes weren't developed along the lines of the F-35. Nothing wrong with profits if you invest in companies making them.



The only parasite are Communists who want to usurp the capitalist elites with communist elites and putting not some people but ALL people in economic misery. NO THANK YOU!!!

The unions can buy controlling shares in Union Pacific if they want to run it!
Don’t you claim that “paying for all the parts” is what entitles business owners to a cut of the added value created by workers’ labor?

Feel free to explain how an elected or meritocratic group of directors responsible to the general public would be more tyrannical than a tiny unelected ruling class with no responsibilities to the public.
 
Don’t you claim that “paying for all the parts” is what entitles business owners to a cut of the added value created by workers’ labor?
You make claims with no proof. Show me written history of your claims.
Feel free to explain how an elected or meritocratic group of directors responsible to the general public would be more tyrannical than a tiny unelected ruling class with no responsibilities to the public.
Buy SHARES in the companies. EARN AND OWN.
 

EatTheRich

President
You make claims with no proof. Show me written history of your claims.


Buy SHARES in the companies. EARN AND OWN.
Do you understand how this prescription takes the rule of wealth for granted?

Suppose someone objected to being held in slavery with their family, and your answer was, “Buy yourself and your family from your master. Earn your freedom and own your family yourself.”
 




Do you understand how this prescription takes the rule of wealth for granted?

Suppose someone objected to being held in slavery with their family, and your answer was, “Buy yourself and your family from your master. Earn your freedom and own your family yourself.”
Well, as I already pointed out individuals got land grants too. Amounting to way more than the railroads got acreage wise. In both cases private industry manufactured many/most/all the equipment required for the enterprise. Why do railroads owe something people who got grants don't?

And people did buy themselves out of slavery and indentured servitude. And today people don't start as either.


Remember YOU want to replace TODAY'S capitalism not yesterday's but today's.
 

EatTheRich

President
Well, as I already pointed out individuals got land grants too. Amounting to way more than the railroads got acreage wise. In both cases private industry manufactured many/most/all the equipment required for the enterprise. Why do railroads owe something people who got grants don't?

And people did buy themselves out of slavery and indentured servitude. And today people don't start as either.


Remember YOU want to replace TODAY'S capitalism not yesterday's but today's.
The railroad magnates ... that is, half a dozen already rich people ... were given nearly 7.5% of the total land area of the country. The workers they exploited built railroads ... while they did nothing but sit back and profit. Their descendants own the railroads today. They have done nothing to advance the cause of humanity, have done nothing but levied what amounted to a toll on those who wanted to make an honest living bringing transportation to the masses, the workers who built those railroads.
 

EatTheRich

President
Well, as I already pointed out individuals got land grants too. Amounting to way more than the railroads got acreage wise. In both cases private industry manufactured many/most/all the equipment required for the enterprise. Why do railroads owe something people who got grants don't?

And people did buy themselves out of slavery and indentured servitude. And today people don't start as either.


Remember YOU want to replace TODAY'S capitalism not yesterday's but today's.
Exactly. And people buying their way out from slavery does not make slavery fair any more than people buying their way out of their wages system makes capitalism fair.

Today people start with less economic security than a slave (though of course not being chattel is more precious).

Replacing today’s capitalism is an imperative if the reckless feeding of populism and fascism, the imperialist system, and escalating economic, political, and environmental crises (required to maintain profitability) are not going to doom humanity to catastrophic global nuclear destruction.
 
Top