Sen. Rick Scott Tells Communists And Socialists To Stay Out Of Florida

Guno צְבִי

Guno צְבִי

We fight, We win
If Florida GOP Sen. Rick Scott is really considering running for president, he’s found a bizarre campaign pitch to potential voters: Telling them to stay out of his state.

Scott, who reportedly is considering a late entry into the race for the 2024 Republican nomination, attempted to throw out some performative red meat on Tuesday by “warning socialists and communists not to travel to Florida.”

Not surprisingly, Scott’s video was ridiculed on social media, with people pointing out it probably won’t help tourism, or the many Florida residents who rely on socialist-style programs like Social Security or Medicare.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sen-rick-scott-tells-communists-185206353.html
 
Imagine this! AND, he doesn't know what socialism is...shall we tell him what programs Americans have enjoyed for decades that are "socialist"?
Police, Fire departments, public schools, infrastructure: roads, bridges, libraries, etc.
 
Bet skelator doesn't even know the definition of communist or socialist.

The next time there is a hurricane that strikes Florida none of those socialist FEMA dollars.

You can bet they will be standing there with their hands out.

Send them a box of boot straps.
 
guno said:
Imagine this! AND, he doesn't know what socialism is...shall we tell him what programs Americans have enjoyed for decades that are "socialist"?
Police, Fire departments, public schools, infrastructure: roads, bridges, libraries, etc.
Click to expand...

It is the proper role of govt to provide police and fire services as well as infrastructure. It is NOT the proper role of govt to educate children or maintain libraries or manage ponzi schemes like social security and Medicare
 
guno said:
Imagine this! AND, he doesn't know what socialism is...shall we tell him what programs Americans have enjoyed for decades that are "socialist"?
Police, Fire departments, public schools, infrastructure: roads, bridges, libraries, etc.
Click to expand...

Those aren’t socialist, they are services we pay for.

Big difference.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Those aren’t socialist, they are services we pay for.

Big difference.
Click to expand...

When the government forcibly takes money from you, whether you agree or not. When they spend that money, 'on your behalf' on certain services they are 'giving back to you, whether you like it or want it or not, that is socialism.

It is the forceable redistribution of wealth to gov't determined priorities on behalf of the people.


But please tell us what the difference is?
 
guno said:
Imagine this! AND, he doesn't know what socialism is...shall we tell him what programs Americans have enjoyed for decades that are "socialist"?
Police, Fire departments, public schools, infrastructure: roads, bridges, libraries, etc.
Click to expand...
FEMA, hurricane aid.

I guess he doesn’t like their money spent in Florida or if they’re moving there the taxes they pay?
 
Yakuda said:
Alternating other people's posts is a sign of limited intelligence. It's also a violation of forum rules.
Click to expand...

FYP means Fixed your Post and is a way to say i am writing what you intended but DID NOT write.


And more importantly you do realize that is what your post actually said right?

You are creating a system of determination of what is acceptable socialism or not by your very subjective view.

If you ask 300MM people in the US which of the gov't delivered services they think are the "proper role of gov't to deliver or not', you will get near 300MM different answers in certain areas.

As you know, no gov't can rule to the subjective view of one, but what you are establishing is that Subjective Views should matter (as you think yours should) and what that has to then lead to, is us using elections to determine WHICH collection of subjective views get to lead.

That is the only logical outcome of your position where you assert 'subjective views should determine this', that we basically vote then on it, to determine the majority of the subjective views.
 
Yakuda said:
Alternating other people's posts is a sign of limited intelligence. It's also a violation of forum rules.
Click to expand...
It only violates the rule if the name is not changed
16. Quote Box Altering:

One can alter a quote box by removing some of a wall of text to expose the specific part you are responding to, or splitting it apart so you can respond to each item one at a time. However, altering the words posted and changing the meaning of what they said for whatever reason (a joke for instance) is not allowed unless you change the "quoted by" portion of the quote to make it clear that the original poster did not post what you are "making" them say. We will begin by deleting these posts, and if it continues we will get into banning. I will update this rule with changes until it settles in.

Example:

A bad "quote" that we would delete:


quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Damocles
Boy I love to Watch folks burn flags, especially if they are also supporting the slaughter of innocents!



An altered "quote" that would not be deleted:


quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by NOT Dam0cles
Boy I love to Watch folks burn flags, especially if they are also supporting the slaughter of innocents!


 
QP! said:
When the government forcibly takes money from you, whether you agree or not. When they spend that money, 'on your behalf' on certain services they are 'giving back to you, whether you like it or want it or not, that is socialism.

It is the forceable redistribution of wealth to gov't determined priorities on behalf of the people.


But please tell us what the difference is?
Click to expand...

They aren’t forcibly taking it, it’s something we agreed to pay for because we want the benefits of what it offers.

There is a big difference there.

Any society, regardless of ideology, needs to maintain certain services in order to remain a society. These are agreed upon services which we all adhere to in order to be part of that society.
 
QP! said:
FYP means Fixed your Post and is a way to say i am writing what you intended but DID NOT write.


And more importantly you do realize that is what your post actually said right?

You are creating a system of determination of what is acceptable socialism or not by your very subjective view.

If you ask 300MM people in the US which of the gov't delivered services they think are the "proper role of gov't to deliver or not', you will get near 300MM different answers in certain areas.

As you know, no gov't can rule to the subjective view of one, but what you are establishing is that Subjective Views should matter (as you think yours should) and what that has to then lead to, is us using elections to determine WHICH collection of subjective views get to lead.

That is the only logical outcome of your position where you assert 'subjective views should determine this', that we basically vote then on it, to determine the majority of the subjective views.
Click to expand...

Rule.16 violation asshole..
 
Phantasmal said:
It only violates the rule if the name is not changed
16. Quote Box Altering:

One can alter a quote box by removing some of a wall of text to expose the specific part you are responding to, or splitting it apart so you can respond to each item one at a time. However, altering the words posted and changing the meaning of what they said for whatever reason (a joke for instance) is not allowed unless you change the "quoted by" portion of the quote to make it clear that the original poster did not post what you are "making" them say. We will begin by deleting these posts, and if it continues we will get into banning. I will update this rule with changes until it settles in.

Example:

A bad "quote" that we would delete:


quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Damocles
Boy I love to Watch folks burn flags, especially if they are also supporting the slaughter of innocents!



An altered "quote" that would not be deleted:


quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by NOT Dam0cles
Boy I love to Watch folks burn flags, especially if they are also supporting the slaughter of innocents!
Click to expand...

Oh course another leftist ^^^^^
 
guno said:
Imagine this! AND, he doesn't know what socialism is...shall we tell him what programs Americans have enjoyed for decades that are "socialist"?
Police, Fire departments, public schools, infrastructure: roads, bridges, libraries, etc.
Click to expand...

If that is true then every country has a socialist government. That is not the standard economic definition of socialism used to distinguish between different types of economic systems.
 
Yakuda said:
It is the proper role of govt to provide police and fire services as well as infrastructure. It is NOT the proper role of govt to educate children or maintain libraries or manage ponzi schemes like social security and Medicare
Click to expand...

The Constitution left those decisions to the states about what functions to perform other than those delegated to the central government. They all chose to provide a public education which is their largest expenditure. It is as appropriate a role for government to provide education as it is for police and fire.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
They aren’t forcibly taking it, it’s something we agreed to pay for because we want the benefits of what it offers.

There is a big difference there.

Any society, regardless of ideology, needs to maintain certain services in order to remain a society. These are agreed upon services which we all adhere to in order to be part of that society.
Click to expand...

That is a lie as many libertarians and Sovereign citizens will tell you.


They do not want all the government services you want just as you do not want all the services a leftists want.

And there is NO WAY to opt out of paying your taxes, so that is money is forcibly taken, and used for services whether Tinkerpeach or the Libertarian or Sovereign citizen, wants it or not, and you will go jail if you do not pay your taxes.

So no, there is no difference and once again you are being stupid. You think 'the things i want paid for gov't are the things everyone else wants and agrees with and thus it is ok'.

The is very typically republclown thinking where they cannot separate their own opinions from those of others.


But please tell me how you 'agreed' to pay for some services but you did not agree to pay for the 'ones' you disagree with and would call socialist?
 
Flash said:
If that is true then every country has a socialist government. That is not the standard economic definition of socialism used to distinguish between different types of economic systems.
Click to expand...

Every country has ELEMENTS of socialism within their government, yes.

Socialism just means the 'government takes your money (you cannot refuse) and decides on your behalf, and that of all citizens what is best and needed for them in terms of Service, Manufacturing, other'.

A purely free market or a libertarian fantasy land will let all citizens individually decide on those things and pay for the things they want and those they do not. An OPT OUT is possible.

So the question is not 'if America is on the socialist spectrum' but 'where it sits on the socialist spectrum'.

If is certainly less on the socialist spectrum then Canada, but more on the socialist spectrum than Afghanistan or what Libertarians would define as their ideal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top