Let the healing begin.

by that definition, Biden and the Democrats do not want any kind of socialism.

they haven't called for the nationalization of industries.

 

You are correct. The political world doesn't seem to understand the difference between socialism and heavy government spending. What democrats want is more government and more government spending. So do the republicans, by the way. That is why we as a nationa have so much federal government and are fighting for more.

 

Enron is doa meanwhile the government incentives that caused the housing disaster are still in play...

 

No one is suggesting that they will be.
What will be phased out is the sale of new cars powered with internal combustion engines early.
Even in the UK there is no talk of banning internal combustion engines and the 2030 date allows for hybrid cars to continue being produced and sold.
What will happen though is more and more city centres will ban ICEs in order to reduce harmful pollutants such as carbon monoxide.
Much like with mask wearing, people don't have the right to endanger others with their harmful emissions.

 

And yet, in spite of that, CNN is still broadcasting.

In reality though, we all accept a certain amount of "endangering others" in many aspects of our lives.

 

At no point is that acceptable.

 

And yet, here we are. 83% of American adults drive regularly. When they do, they are "endangering others" to a small degree (tens of thousands of Americans are killed by automobiles every year, and many more are injured). There are various other activities that huge swaths of the population participate in which endanger others too, and we all accept it.

 

They are only endangering others if they drive badly. Speeding, driving too close behind, while drunk etc.
People like to compare gun deaths with traffic incident deaths when restrictions are suggested on gun ownership but like firearms, vehicles are only dangerous when used irresponsibly.

 

That's false, and ignorant.

 

Give me an example where the driver is not responsible for a traffic incident.
I don't use the word ''accident'' when it comes to car crashes.

Ps, I've had posts deleted and warnings issued for calling others ignorant.

 

Is it a trick question? LOL

How about brake failure, tire blowout, debris hitting the windshield, 100 car pileup

or bridge collapse: LOL

 

Here's one:

 

Clear example of driving too fast for the road conditions.
If the driver had slowed right down when he saw protesters on the road it is unlikely that it would have happened.

 

Not at all. The driver was driving within the speed limit, and was not cited. The lawsuit the protester brought against the driver, the county, and the college for allowing her to play on the freeway and endanger herself was dismissed.

 

The speed limit is not relevant, the road conditions dictated that they should slow right down.
If it was a herd of deer on the road instead you would be stupid to not slow down.
Same if the road was covered in snow.
The speed limit is the maximum legal speed you can drive under normal conditions. It is not a right to drive at that speed no matter the conditions.
Not that I would support the victim in trying to claim damages. They were clearly in breach of the law by walking on the highway but the driver was responsible as well due to not slowing down when they saw the road partly blocked by protesters.

 

Proving that not only is democracy the "worst system of governance" (Churchill...forget his blind ideological "except for all the rest" nonsense), it is unworkable as well....with an actual attack (eg 9/11) from outside being the only way to briefly bring the nation together ...

eg, lets see how China does over the next decade, which doggedly introduces and achieves its five-year plans, without threat of reversal by an opposing party as in the US.

In fact, China has planned to ensure CO2 emissions will peak by 2030, and the country will be carbon neutral by 2060, a great achievement for a huge developing country. (Of course it will be a fully developed country by then).

 

The way forward is for reform of WTO rules. Sovereign countries playing by their own rules for their own advantage (eg "America First") cannot achieve sustainable growth in all nations, a necessity for global peace.

You are living in the past. Russia is now a capitalist democracy, and yet:

(1) [Socialists] Do you believe that under capitalism the rich get richer while the poor get poorer? : CapitalismVSocialism (reddit.com)

" In Russia, population peaked in 1992 (soon after the collapse of communism) at 148.7 million and reached a low of 142.7 in 2008, Russia's population has not recovered to the same level. Life expectancy fell from 69.46 years in 1988 to 64.47 years in 1994, a drop of 5 years life expectancy in 6 years (Russia only reached 1988 levels of life expectancy in 2011) and GDP per capita declined by about 55%".

 

1. Oh gee, the only thing that can save the world is a huge corrupt bureaucracy if only it's correctly reformed (87th time the charm, right). And countries, especially rogue ones like China will immediately stop cheating, bribing bureaucrats and promoting their own priorities and interests and will start playing by this bureaucracy's rules, if only the bureaucrats correctly reform it. Why didn't I think of that? LOL

2. Former socialist countries including Russia that constituted the Soviet Union are ALL moving away from failed socialist economy to capitalism.... and you here advocate that we move from the insanely successful capitalist economy to socialism. Duh, thanks dude, but no thanks

 

I will accept that I have to deal with your PTSD as a result of you having lost your no doubt privileged position* in one of the former nations turned 'socialist' that you mentioned...which means you are incapable of seeing alternatives to the current hyper-partisanship wracking the democracies.

* poor people often voted for those socialist governments eg, Chile, Venezuela**; or accepted the revolution (eg Cuba) .

**But often evil elements in the CIA supporting the military industrial complex and vested corporate interests in the US set about wrecking those fledgling socialist democracies, eg, supporting the actual overthrow of Allende in Chile, and obstruction of Chavez in Venezuela.

No I am not advocating that at all; but as I noted above, your PTSD prevents you from reading what I actually write.

 

The subprime mortgage disaster was caused by private banksters playing the financial industry casino, with their 'chips' being those flashy, complex derivatives termed "financial weapons of mass destruction" (Buffett).

 

Right.... too bad the socialist dream of only one political party, no partisanship, no dissent, no freedom of speech, no political freedoms is still not very appealing. Must be my PTSD LOL Dude, get real, not only I AM capable of seen alternatives you advocate, I lived that alternative half of my life.

Too bad these poor people don't realize that the goal (and certainly the eventual result) of revolutions and socialist governments is not to make them richer, it is to make everyone except party elites equally poor and totally controlled by the state. Of course the party propaganda and rhetoric calls it equality, which in fact is perversely accurate.

 

Like I said, you won't/can't admit of the possibility of democratic socialism. Bernie Sanders refers to it as "an economy that works for all". Nothing to do with what you have written above. If it's not your PTSD, then start thinking for yourself....and stop spouting the ideological garbage about "freedom", as you have done above.

Addressed above; I defer to Bernie Sanders.

 

Dude, you were right the first time, your imaginary socialist paradise does cause PTSD in real life in all its survivors LOL

And the economy IS working for all. Caveat, you need to actually put in an effort. Duh.

Millions of immigrants come to the US, Canada and other Western Countries without a penny in their pocket and without speaking the language and ten years later they have a house, two cars, $200K invested in the stock market, they vacation in Hawaii, travel the world and are well respected at their work and in their communities. Even uneducated Mexican illegals are making decent living due to their hard work and drive. Those who fail to succeed in contemporary Western world have only themselves to blame, Sanders idea of economy that works for all is rewarding the lazy.

Can the system be improved? Absolutely. Do we need insane and invariably failing Sanders' socialist garbage? Absolutely not.

 

Arguably, Bernie went very close to becoming Prez in the USA. Nothing imaginary about it.

Evil ideological garbage, in a world of plenty.

Addressed above. Your Libertarian-based ideology is beyond evil (but forgive them for they know not what they do...)

Please outline in specific terms how "the system" can be improved.

Note: any system that regards generational unemployment, or the existence of poverty ghettos as 'natural' (black or otherwise) will be immediately rejected.