socialism ain't free stuff

To be charitable you haven't got an argument.

This is clueless. You miss a key aspect: the protection of property rights. You also miss out the importance of Hayek: distributed knowledge is just as important for firm planning.

 

The prefix doesn't help. Humanitarian genocide doesn't make genocide any better. Democratic Fascism doesn't make fascism any more desirable. The nature of socialism is right in front of your face. Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her family were harassed by your thought police. Fidel would have executed them for what he considers incorrect thoughts. Socialists attacked Senator Cruz's wife and kids because of his thoughts. Mao would have murdered them for what he considered incorrect thoughts.

Regardless of the prefix, you are a bunch of intolerant genocidal maniacs. Own it already.

 

In Canada and Scandinavia there were no purges.

USSR was a Communist Nation -- there were excesses which were no worse then excesses by USA. In Japan 1945, Korea 1950-53, Southeast Asia, US Military killed a total of 2.5 Million civilians.

US Incarceration Rate since 1990s is as high as Soviet Incarceration Rate during Stalin's Era.

Both Communism and Capitalism put little value on people. Socialism values everyone.

 

So he lied when he called it national socialism?

 

That you have to ask that question, when he murdered socialists, is a tad revealing. I brought it up deliberately. It guarantees ignorance of socialism is keenly observed.

 

So our only choices are Venezuela or Ethopia?

 

As noted, a depiction of Venezuela as a socialist model isn't factually based:

So while U.S. sanctions have exacerbated the problem, no political/economic system is viable when corrupt black market players are exploiting the situation, rather than combatting it. Note that in Angola, there's been a very similar circumstance:

 

Socialism for corporations, especially corporations that profit from wars of aggression, works GREAT!

It is the best way to redistribute tax revenues from workers and tax payers to corporations yet devised by man.

 

socialism ain't free stuff.

True. It is less stuff.

 

None of those things are part of socialism.

 

The only group that has more definitions for socialism than anti socialists are socialists.

 

It isn't difficult: worker ownership and control of the means of production.

 

I'm sure it all looks great on paper.

Please point to where I can seeing it working in application.

 

You could say that of any supporter of Austrian Economics. We currently operate under an authoritarianism led by corporate elites. There are still opportunities. Look at the Labour Party in the UK, with its focus on worker ownership systems.

 

Don’t tell me tell your fellow travelers. Again, I’m more socialist in practice than any of you apparently based on your definition.

There are a couple like you that at least maintain a modicum of volunteerism in your theorizing. But the vast majority here just want to take people’s crap. And admit it openly. If you really want more socialism you need to educate these folks. Because they are killing you.

 

Nope. I simply continue to promote worker ownership within the Labour Party. Protection of property rights, and that's what socialism delivers, must come from change at the top.

 

Whoopie. The United States isn't Austrian, and it sure as hell will never adopt Marxism. Best to keep those principles within the Xenophobic Cultures that can appreciate them and police them.

 

Sounds like you're not aware of Austrian economics or you embrace authoritarianism to the detriment of the individual. Either way, not a good look

 

Why is it that every time a social nation is mentioned, there is a reason they are the right type of socialism?

 

I'm very much aware. You've been blowing the horn for it for years on this site.

Unworkable outside isolationist xenophobic societies.

 

Given your last sentence, clearly you're still struggling. I'm very sorry that I haven't been able to inform you of the importance of protecting an individual's rights.

 

How many of these countries are socialist?

 

Oh stop. Lame appeal to emotion.

 

Nobody is stopping anybody from having what you want. The thing is most people don’t want the responsibility. It’s the same apathy that keeps people earning wages in a capitalistic model.

From our previous exchanges I believe you want policies from the top that promote or ease facilitation of your goals not force them, correct?

 

We cant ignore the coercion present in the labour contract. If we had outcome based purely on exchange, we would receive the value of our labour. We don't.

Protection of property rights through democracy? Yep.