The House Bill Would Mean a Tax Hike for Millions of Seniors. Learn More

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Communism

Message 11 of 104 (64 Views)

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Richva wrote:
(ChasKy53 in red text)

 

You may want to re read that Constitution. "The Gub'ment" is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. It is a representative democracy and not some undeveloped banana dictatorship.  The people decide who gets the benefit of tax dollars in the United States. I am not sure which country you are using as a template. 

Do you really think it is a good idea for people using the government as their enforcer decide how much of the money thy earn people should be allowed to spend as they see fit? Do you really thin that "the people" should decided that the have nots have a right to the property of the haves?

 

I read nothing in Richva's posting that refers to "people using the government as their enforcer", or anything about "haves" and "have nots". Why do you have to constantly twist what others post? Oh ............ that's all you have.

If the government is not the "enforcer", how does the the people deciding who gets benefits from taxes happen?

When you are talking about people getting benefits from taxes you obviously have someone paying those taxes. Hence, the haves and the have nots.

 

Infrastructure is not just roads and bridges. it is schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, sewage pipes.  If you have them, life is good and you are in the 1%. If you are in the bottom 5%, you probably don't have them but need them in order to have a chance at equal opportunity. 

 

Who are those 5% that you want to base law on - while forgetting the 94%. Yes, Rich, it is not only the 1% that has sewers.

You continue twisting what others say. You mention only "sewers", have you forgot the schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, equal opportunity? Oh, I forget ............ the rich should have 'PRIVELEGE', better everything.

O.K. hospitals, schools, and the rest of it - is it only the 1% who have access to that? And, talk about "twisting what others say" - look to your own snark about "PRIVILEGE".


 


 


 

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 25,306
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: Communism

Message 12 of 104 (65 Views)


rk9152 wrote:

Richva wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Marx codified the ideology, Stalin illustrated how naive Marx was. I am well versed in Comminism and how that which is called "Communism" (USSR e.g.) is not the thinking of Marx.

 

You may want to re read that Constitution. "The Gub'ment" is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. It is a representative democracy and not some undeveloped banana dictatorship.  The people decide who gets the benefit of tax dollars in the United States. I am not sure which country you are using as a template. 

Do you really think it is a good idea for people using the government as their enforcer decide how much of the money thy earn people should be allowed to spend as they see fit? Do you really thin that "the people" should decided that the have nots have a right to the property of the haves?

 

Infrastructure is not just roads and bridges. it is schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, sewage pipes.  If you have them, life is good and you are in the 1%. If you are in the bottom 5%, you probably don't have them but need them in order to have a chance at equal opportunity. 

 

Who are those 5% that you want to base law on - while forgetting the 94%. Yes, Rich, it is not only the 1% that has sewers.


 


You keep talking about Marx and when I tell you what he wrote you change to Stalin. Do you have any idea at all what Communism is or how it came about?  Do you want to talk about Marx's vision of government (as you asked) or Stalin's?  Oh, is this another Trump style "What about...." to be used when cornered?
Did I not answer that in the post you are responding to?
  • Marx was a writer who came up with an idea. Stalin was a dictoror who used it as an excuse. Nobody believes Communism as defined by any government that called itself communist works. If you have a different definition, you need to tell me or my statement stands. 
  • Marx didn't come up with it, it had been around for years. He just wrote the book. As to definitions, I'm just citing the guy who wrote the book.
  • The government is a government of the people.  It does enforce laws as written by the people's representatives.  Some laws are not just and some enforcement is unequal. You are talking in too broad a set of terms to answer the question. In short, what the heck are you talking about?  
  • What is the question?
  • I am talking about the bottom 5% of the economic list. Education, housing, meals, health care, policing. In general, none of these are adequate for providing an equal footing with the other 95%. 
  • Are you talking about people or services with your 5% vs 95% words? I assumed you meant people since you said how good life is for the 1%.

 


 


Obviously - people, services, and infrastructure - as a single indivisible unit that compromises the United States of America.

Trying to separate them is blatantly dishonest demagoguery - a favorite rightwing  disingenuity...

 

 

Have pity for Melania - she wakes up with a jerk every morning
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 8,174
Registered: ‎11-18-2009

Re: Communism

Message 13 of 104 (59 Views)
No its NOT all ive "got". the reason was stated, and thats all you "get"..whether you get it or not.
So it begins.
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Communism

Message 14 of 104 (59 Views)

Richva wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Marx codified the ideology, Stalin illustrated how naive Marx was. I am well versed in Comminism and how that which is called "Communism" (USSR e.g.) is not the thinking of Marx.

 

You may want to re read that Constitution. "The Gub'ment" is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. It is a representative democracy and not some undeveloped banana dictatorship.  The people decide who gets the benefit of tax dollars in the United States. I am not sure which country you are using as a template. 

Do you really think it is a good idea for people using the government as their enforcer decide how much of the money thy earn people should be allowed to spend as they see fit? Do you really thin that "the people" should decided that the have nots have a right to the property of the haves?

 

Infrastructure is not just roads and bridges. it is schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, sewage pipes.  If you have them, life is good and you are in the 1%. If you are in the bottom 5%, you probably don't have them but need them in order to have a chance at equal opportunity. 

 

Who are those 5% that you want to base law on - while forgetting the 94%. Yes, Rich, it is not only the 1% that has sewers.


 


You keep talking about Marx and when I tell you what he wrote you change to Stalin. Do you have any idea at all what Communism is or how it came about?  Do you want to talk about Marx's vision of government (as you asked) or Stalin's?  Oh, is this another Trump style "What about...." to be used when cornered?
Did I not answer that in the post you are responding to?
  • Marx was a writer who came up with an idea. Stalin was a dictoror who used it as an excuse. Nobody believes Communism as defined by any government that called itself communist works. If you have a different definition, you need to tell me or my statement stands. 
  • Marx didn't come up with it, it had been around for years. He just wrote the book. As to definitions, I'm just citing the guy who wrote the book.
  • The government is a government of the people.  It does enforce laws as written by the people's representatives.  Some laws are not just and some enforcement is unequal. You are talking in too broad a set of terms to answer the question. In short, what the heck are you talking about?  
  • What is the question?
  • I am talking about the bottom 5% of the economic list. Education, housing, meals, health care, policing. In general, none of these are adequate for providing an equal footing with the other 95%. 
  • Are you talking about people or services with your 5% vs 95% words? I assumed you meant people since you said how good life is for the 1%.

 


 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,645
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: Communism

Message 15 of 104 (65 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Richva wrote:
(ChasKy53 in red text)

 

You may want to re read that Constitution. "The Gub'ment" is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. It is a representative democracy and not some undeveloped banana dictatorship.  The people decide who gets the benefit of tax dollars in the United States. I am not sure which country you are using as a template. 

Do you really think it is a good idea for people using the government as their enforcer decide how much of the money thy earn people should be allowed to spend as they see fit? Do you really thin that "the people" should decided that the have nots have a right to the property of the haves?

 

I read nothing in Richva's posting that refers to "people using the government as their enforcer", or anything about "haves" and "have nots". Why do you have to constantly twist what others post? Oh ............ that's all you have.

 

Infrastructure is not just roads and bridges. it is schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, sewage pipes.  If you have them, life is good and you are in the 1%. If you are in the bottom 5%, you probably don't have them but need them in order to have a chance at equal opportunity. 

 

Who are those 5% that you want to base law on - while forgetting the 94%. Yes, Rich, it is not only the 1% that has sewers.

You continue twisting what others say. You mention only "sewers", have you forgot the schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, equal opportunity? Oh, I forget ............ the rich should have 'PRIVELEGE', better everything.


 


 


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 12,554
Registered: ‎02-28-2008

Re: Communism

Message 16 of 104 (66 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Marx codified the ideology, Stalin illustrated how naive Marx was. I am well versed in Comminism and how that which is called "Communism" (USSR e.g.) is not the thinking of Marx.

 

You may want to re read that Constitution. "The Gub'ment" is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. It is a representative democracy and not some undeveloped banana dictatorship.  The people decide who gets the benefit of tax dollars in the United States. I am not sure which country you are using as a template. 

Do you really think it is a good idea for people using the government as their enforcer decide how much of the money thy earn people should be allowed to spend as they see fit? Do you really thin that "the people" should decided that the have nots have a right to the property of the haves?

 

Infrastructure is not just roads and bridges. it is schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, sewage pipes.  If you have them, life is good and you are in the 1%. If you are in the bottom 5%, you probably don't have them but need them in order to have a chance at equal opportunity. 

 

Who are those 5% that you want to base law on - while forgetting the 94%. Yes, Rich, it is not only the 1% that has sewers.


 


You keep talking about Marx and when I tell you what he wrote you change to Stalin. Do you have any idea at all what Communism is or how it came about?  Do you want to talk about Marx's vision of government (as you asked) or Stalin's?  Oh, is this another Trump style "What about...." to be used when cornered?
  • Marx was a writer who came up with an idea. Stalin was a dictoror who used it as an excuse. Nobody believes Communism as defined by any government that called itself communist works. If you have a different definition, you need to tell me or my statement stands. 
  • The government is a government of the people.  It does enforce laws as written by the people's representatives.  Some laws are not just and some enforcement is unequal. You are talking in too broad a set of terms to answer the question. In short, what the heck are you talking about?  
  • I am talking about the bottom 5% of the economic list. Education, housing, meals, health care, policing. In general, none of these are adequate for providing an equal footing with the other 95%. 

 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Communism

Message 17 of 104 (66 Views)

Richva wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Richva wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

 

But, back to the basics - what do you think of Marx's vision of government? Is it desireable, is it practical?


True, we can elect Communists if we want - and the question is what sort of government do we want? As to wealth redistribution by the government - again, true, however is that the sort of government we want?

Marx thought government would fade away.  I doubt anyone believes that will ever happen no matter how anti-government they are.  I am not sure what YOU think Marx said about government but I have not seen anything in your posts. 

Then YOU haven't been reading MINE very well. That "fade away" aspect reflects the naivity and danger as illustrated by Stalin, etal.

 

Please define wealth redistribution.  Taxing those who have been the beneficiaries of our economic system and using it to build the infrastructure to help those who have not benefitted? Schools, lunch programs, roads, ....

It is simply the government deciding who is entitled to whose money. Read the posts about the 1%ers and Uberrich and you'll get a sense of the mindset I am referring to.

 

I miss your point about infrastructure for those who have not benefited. Roads are roads - what has "benefited" to do with that?


 


You keep talking about Marx and when I tell you what he wrote you change to Stalin. Do you have any idea at all what Communism is or how it came about?  Do you want to talk about Marx's vision of government (as you asked) or Stalin's?  Oh, is this another Trump style "What about...." to be used when cornered?

Marx codified the ideology, Stalin illustrated how naive Marx was. I am well versed in Comminism and how that which is called "Communism" (USSR e.g.) is not the thinking of Marx.

 

You may want to re read that Constitution. "The Gub'ment" is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. It is a representative democracy and not some undeveloped banana dictatorship.  The people decide who gets the benefit of tax dollars in the United States. I am not sure which country you are using as a template. 

Do you really think it is a good idea for people using the government as their enforcer decide how much of the money thy earn people should be allowed to spend as they see fit? Do you really thin that "the people" should decided that the have nots have a right to the property of the haves?

 

Infrastructure is not just roads and bridges. it is schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, sewage pipes.  If you have them, life is good and you are in the 1%. If you are in the bottom 5%, you probably don't have them but need them in order to have a chance at equal opportunity. 

 

Who are those 5% that you want to base law on - while forgetting the 94%. Yes, Rich, it is not only the 1% that has sewers.


 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Communism

Message 18 of 104 (67 Views)

MIseker wrote:
Read the opinion piece I posted. Thats pretty close. Its mostly a boogeyman..as was democracy to stalin. all contrived by the world military industrial complex.

The military industrial complex created what - Stalin, the USSR, the Cold War or just some ill defined "boogeyman"?

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 12,554
Registered: ‎02-28-2008

Re: Communism

Message 19 of 104 (86 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Richva wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

 

But, back to the basics - what do you think of Marx's vision of government? Is it desireable, is it practical?


True, we can elect Communists if we want - and the question is what sort of government do we want? As to wealth redistribution by the government - again, true, however is that the sort of government we want?

Marx thought government would fade away.  I doubt anyone believes that will ever happen no matter how anti-government they are.  I am not sure what YOU think Marx said about government but I have not seen anything in your posts. 

Then YOU haven't been reading MINE very well. That "fade away" aspect reflects the naivity and danger as illustrated by Stalin, etal.

 

Please define wealth redistribution.  Taxing those who have been the beneficiaries of our economic system and using it to build the infrastructure to help those who have not benefitted? Schools, lunch programs, roads, ....

It is simply the government deciding who is entitled to whose money. Read the posts about the 1%ers and Uberrich and you'll get a sense of the mindset I am referring to.

 

I miss your point about infrastructure for those who have not benefited. Roads are roads - what has "benefited" to do with that?


 


You keep talking about Marx and when I tell you what he wrote you change to Stalin. Do you have any idea at all what Communism is or how it came about?  Do you want to talk about Marx's vision of government (as you asked) or Stalin's?  Oh, is this another Trump style "What about...." to be used when cornered?

 

You may want to re read that Constitution. "The Gub'ment" is Of the people, By the people, and For the people. It is a representative democracy and not some undeveloped banana dictatorship.  The people decide who gets the benefit of tax dollars in the United States. I am not sure which country you are using as a template. 

 

Infrastructure is not just roads and bridges. it is schools, hospitals, data lines, water pipes, sewage pipes.  If you have them, life is good and you are in the 1%. If you are in the bottom 5%, you probably don't have them but need them in order to have a chance at equal opportunity. 

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 25,306
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: Communism

[ Edited ]
Message 20 of 104 (88 Views)

It is hoped that all the trump supporters including anti-marxist and anti-communist shills got their thirty pieces of silver up front - liddle donnie has a well-documented history of not paying "the little people" what he rightfully owes...

 

 

Have pity for Melania - she wakes up with a jerk every morning