There are some things the Government is best suited to do...and they're enumerated in the Constitution. Just because the Government prints money or oversees interstate commerce doesn't make us a Socialist State. Although, I'll admit, there are many leftist policies and programs (e.g. Obamacare) that should be overturned. so·cial·ism ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/ noun noun: socialism 1.a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. synonyms: leftism, welfarism; radicalism, progressivism, social democracy; communism, Marxism
Exactly, Yak, socialism isnt free, like your definition clearly demonstrates. Those roads and schools and social security arent free...they are paid for by you and I and everyone, for everyones use. That is socialism.
Give me back the money I put into Social Security (even with these inflated POS dollars) and I'll be glad to opt out of the system. Don't want it...never did. Public schools are broken and the transportation infrastructure is falling apart...privatize it all...socialism doesn't work.
Would you rather have lived in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics? THAT worked out just dandy, didn't it?
That's because it was communist socialism. But, Canada, the uk, and most or socialist western Europe seems to do ok.
Are you saying that the Canadian or UK Governments control the means of production across their economies? ...I think not.
I don't think Guy understands what Socialism is. It's a political/economic system where the state owns and controls everything. You can't say your government is a Socialist government just because it promotes public education. Whenever the Government can do something more efficiently than the private sector, I'm all for it. However, that's almost never. Take Social Security, for instance...if the private sector were managing private annuities, people would have a lot more money in retirement and the money would actually exist. It wouldn't have been looted by "Progressives" and have to be funded by future taxation. That just makes me sick to my stomach every time I think of it.
Oh sure. Just lovely: View attachment 2071 http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2013/05/21/french-tax-soars-over-100/
No, but thanks anyway: View attachment 2072 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...falls-Eds-socialist-farce-really-tragedy.html
Keep the Marxist philosophy. Unless the destruction of a free economy is your goal. View attachment 2073
Heck, he wouldn't even share with clueless when clueless was giving us one of his sob stories a while back. Remember that one? Lil Joe was bragging about having a driveway full of cars while clueless was without one...I suggested Lil Joe share his bounty with clueless but I don't believe he ever did.
It is an unfortunate fact that many people choose their political stance like a suit of clothing. They put it on, it makes them feel good, and it defines their self image. Russell Brand is a fine example. This is why you never get specifics on issues or a plan. When it comes time for the rubber to hit the road, it doesn't happen. I work for a 503c not for profit corporation. Many of my co-works are very liberal. I hear all the time about how evil corporations are (we are one) and how we should help the poor. Part of my job is hiring part-time over hire to work events. I hire people with skills ranging from the highly technical (programing robotics) to box pushers and chair stackers. I have hired people who are border-line homeless to fill a work call that involves unloading trucks to pushing boxes. My theory is that if we are getting out of paying taxes, then we better damn well be doing some social good and provide some opportunity for those who don't have any. I catch holy hell every time I do this from my liberal staff about not wanting to see "that person" on one of their calls ever again, even if it's only one person on a 4 to 8 man call. That my friends, is liberalism in action.
I'm not saying we shouldn't help those less fortunate than ourselves. In fact, if you look at charitable giving by voting district, you'll find that Republican districts give far more to charitable organizations than their Liberal counterparts. I posted the chart on another thread. Conservatives simply don't feel Liberals/Progressives should take their money to buy votes or fund programs they find morally and ethically reprehensible.
