We need Socialism. Socialism Is A Good Thing. Socialism Promotes The General Welfare.

PoliTalker said:
Hello Threedee,



I think most of those should remain as capitalist ventures. We have the social safety net to provide for most of those needs.

I would be favorable to a government housing plan where the government builds basic no frills housing and then assigns / sells it to the needy who end up with full ownership to do as they please.

One of the things that keeps the poor poor is lack of home ownership. But giving away houses or apartments is fraught with consequences. It could serve as an impetus to not try. Any program which does that would have to place onerous requirements on the recipients to avoid reinforcing laziness.

So maybe in most cases, the recipients would have to work for or pay for most of the housing, but since it is done by the government at no profit, then the housing could be cheaper, and only those of severely limited income would be allowed to apply.
Click to expand...

Okay, I just wanted to establish that almost no one on JPP (except for Marxists like Iola and Fent, whose opinions do not count, because Marxism doesn't count) actually supports socialism, except for BAC, Moony, and LV666, and possibly Frank.
 
Threedee said:
So, that's a "yes" on nationalizing store and online retail. What can brown do for you?
Click to expand...

I obviously am closer to a "yes" than Poli.

I am for maximum productivity...and even the distribution of goods involves productivity.

My guess is that almost ALL distribution of goods will be handled by Internet and mail with a few decades. Brick and mortar stores will be a thing of the past. There may be "try them on" kinds of places...but maybe even they will not exist. We'll have parks where we presently have shopping malls.
 
Is there a way to see all the threads that I have sent or received? I saw your reply to my post last night but not to the posts today. My posts today were not directed at you. They were general rants about the attacks on the rich by people who would do the same things should they one day become rich. And as a reminder, I am not rich by the standards of almost all of our politicians who have been in office for several terms.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I obviously am closer to a "yes" than Poli.

I am for maximum productivity...and even the distribution of goods involves productivity.

My guess is that almost ALL distribution of goods will be handled by Internet and mail with a few decades. Brick and mortar stores will be a thing of the past. There may be "try them on" kinds of places...but maybe even they will not exist. We'll have parks where we presently have shopping malls.
Click to expand...

Maximum productivity? Ah, so you don't want socialism! :cof1:
 
Hello Threedee,

Threedee said:
Okay, I just wanted to establish that almost no one on JPP (except for Marxists like Iola and Fent, whose opinions do not count, because Marxism doesn't count) actually supports socialism, except for BAC, Moony, and LV666, and possibly Frank.
Click to expand...

Do you think JPP is an accurate representation of the nation?
 
Hi Frank,

Frank Apisa said:
I obviously am closer to a "yes" than Poli.

I am for maximum productivity...and even the distribution of goods involves productivity.

My guess is that almost ALL distribution of goods will be handled by Internet and mail with a few decades. Brick and mortar stores will be a thing of the past. There may be "try them on" kinds of places...but maybe even they will not exist. We'll have parks where we presently have shopping malls.
Click to expand...

Parks instead of shopping malls!

That sounds quite nice.

:)
 
Last edited:
PoliTalker said:
Hello Flash,



Great discussion!

And you are so correct.

Technically, Social Security is not socialism, by definition.

But the term 'socialism,' like so many English words, has seen it's definition change over the years.
Click to expand...

And you are correct, but the way people now use the term socialism destroys the concept and results in confusion and irrational arguments. When people defend socialism by claiming it is public schools or post offices or when people attack it by calling Democrats socialists (or communists) because they want more social programs creates is not a constructive argument.

Even worse, when people refer to nations with more expansive welfare systems socialist it again destroys its meaning. Nations like Sweden are capitalist, not socialist. They got rich off capitalism (oil) and used the money for a welfare system to serve a relatively small population of ten million. The oil and gas are industry are privately owned and it is a free market economy that was successful before creating its current welfare system. Like most Nordic countries, it has no minimum wage laws, has school vouchers to attend public or private school choice, and rank high on economic freedom--features not particularly favored by those calling for more socialism in the U. S.

If a company is owned by workers it is capitalist because it is privately owned--it does not have to run by a corporate board of directors.
 
Hello Evergreen58,

Evergreen58 said:
Is there a way to see all the threads that I have sent or received?
Click to expand...

Yes. Click 'Top' available on the right side of this page. Go to 'My Profile' in the upper right. Click (a little down from top left) 'Find latest posts.'

Evergreen58 said:
I saw your reply to my post last night but not to the posts today. My posts today were not directed at you. They were general rants about the attacks on the rich by people who would do the same things should they one day become rich.
Click to expand...

-laughing- SO true.

Evergreen58 said:
And as a reminder, I am not rich by the standards of almost all of our politicians who have been in office for several terms.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear of your good fortune. I am very well off, myself, although comparatively on that standard, not. I think it is more challenging to see beyond wealth and consider it just a tool compared to what is really important in life. If you've got the three basics covered, with the time to enjoy them, you got it made in my view. Those being health, wealth and love. James Taylor sang, and I do believe it is very true, 'The secret of life is enjoying the passage of time.' We only get so long here on the planet. Is money really that important? I don't think that would be a very good final thought, prior to death. 'I may not have had happiness or respect, but at least I was rich.' I would prefer to think, if I had the chance: 'What a great life!'

I'm already there, was a long time ago, so anything else is just frosting on the cake.

I absolutely LOVE life!

And I love the humanity all around me that made it all possible.

Sure would be a lot tougher to enjoy life if I was the only human here.

Yeah. I admit it. I love people.
 
Last edited:
Well you sound like a good person - and you are good to love people. Those who have been scarred by people sometimes find it harder.

Matthew 16:26 makes a good commentary about what mankind should spend his/her time on.

I won't taint this message with the downer of politics this time.

Take care. Be well!
 
When I went to My Profile and looked at latest posts, its looks like I have tons of replies. But I can't see any of them. How do I do that?
 
Hello Evergreen58,

Evergreen58 said:
When I went to My Profile and looked at latest posts, its looks like I have tons of replies. But I can't see any of them. How do I do that?
Click to expand...

Replies to your posts, where you have been quoted, will appear on your 'settings' page.

In the upper right, next to 'My Profile,' click 'Settings.'

When you click on the thread title under 'Who quoted me.' it will take you to the post where you where quoted.

Also, when replying to a post with a quote, if you click the little blue symbol to the right of the posters name in the quote balloon, where it says, for instance, 'Originally Posted by PoliTalker,' that will take you to the original post which is being quoted so you can see if everything was included or it was cherry picked.
 
Hello Threedee,

Threedee said:
If JPP leftists do not support socialism, then the nation certainly rejects it.
Click to expand...

I disagree. And I know you're using the dictionary definition of socialism here. The colloquial definition which is predominately used here has become different.

While you're trying to get everybody to use the precise meaning of socialism, you may as well try to get the word 'gay' back, too. Good luck.

Looks to me like that ship has sailed.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Threedee,



I disagree. And I know you're using the dictionary definition of socialism here. The colloquial definition which is predominately used here has become different.

While you're trying to get everybody to use the precise meaning of socialism, you may as well try to get the word 'gay' back, too. Good luck.

Looks to me like that ship has sailed.
Click to expand...

You're right, socialism is fucking gay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top