Start Here or Call 844-222-0104 to Urge Your Senator to Say No to the Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill

Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 24,489
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: The Progressive Movement

[ Edited ]
Message 331 of 396 (90 Views)

TxGrandpa2 wrote:

pc6063 wrote:

 

 I suggest the novel Animal Farm, which used farm animals to show the  rdisasterous (sic) results of Marxism.



--

One doesn't have to read a book to show the disastrous results of Marxism, or at least a corruption of it.  Just look at the nations that has practiced it.  I would believe that they have found that it doesn't work that well and are now moving more towards capitalism.

 

But if I remember from reading Marx some decades ago, it teaches more about conformity of the individual directed by the state (nation).  Isn't that what has been a main topic here among the 'liberals' over the past several years, conformity directed by the government.  And that government has been controlled by Democrats.

 

Marxism denies religion, and a good many here who claims those traits of conformity has actually denied any religious beliefs.


All  logical rational and sane people cannot truthfully deny the irrefutable evidence that certain Nordic countries using a mix of socialism and capitalism have what are today the economically most functionally balanced - and mentally healthiest societies in the world.

 

They all allow one to be religious or not at their own option.

 

The US doesn't really completely separate church and state.

 

Their governments more completely separate church and state.

 

So what communist countries have been executing people recently solely on the basis of one's being a religious believer?

 

Portugal found a workable solution to drug abuse/addiction - but conservative - and religious people won't consider something with a 14 year record of success.  

That's what happens with minds seized up and corroded by cognitive dissonance - no longer capable of reasoning logically about most things...

 

Pure communism doesn't work - neither does pure capitalism - humans being what they are...

 

We already know how well recieved royalty, "rule by divine right" and other bald-faced lies have been accepted by humans in this time/space continuum...

 

As the last 70 years have demonstrated - a mix of socialism and capitalism has been working rather well.

 

Why shouldn't things be largely absurd futile and transitory?

They are so, we are so, and they and we go very well together.

 

 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 22,121
Registered: ‎03-04-2009

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 332 of 396 (103 Views)

There are enough posters that are requesting an answer to your question or what you have stated.

So. please bring about the comparison between Progresivism  and Marxism. It will be a very interesting discussion. I am waiting.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 3,342
Registered: ‎12-17-2010

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 333 of 396 (99 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

 


Do you wish to engage in discussion or just play games?? Did you view the film, have you read the 10 planks of Maxism? If not, you are not ready to participate seriously.

 

BTW, I recently saw a lecture by our old Buddy Richard Wolff in which he saw a return to the glory days of the '30s coming. That was when the unions, the Socialists, and the Communists banded together to move FDR towards Socialism. The Progressive movement meets with his approval.


Since all you seem to do is play games why should others follow your lead?

Respected Social Butterfly
Posts: 41,658
Registered: ‎06-03-2013

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 334 of 396 (102 Views)

pc6063 wrote:

 

 I suggest the novel Animal Farm, which used farm animals to show the  rdisasterous (sic) results of Marxism.



--

One doesn't have to read a book to show the disastrous results of Marxism, or at least a corruption of it.  Just look at the nations that has practiced it.  I would believe that they have found that it doesn't work that well and are now moving more towards capitalism.

 

But if I remember from reading Marx some decades ago, it teaches more about conformity of the individual directed by the state (nation).  Isn't that what has been a main topic here among the 'liberals' over the past several years, conformity directed by the government.  And that government has been controlled by Democrats.

 

Marxism denies religion, and a good many here who claims those traits of conformity has actually denied any religious beliefs.

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 24,489
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: The Progressive Movement

[ Edited ]
Message 335 of 396 (99 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

alferdpacker wrote:



I already posted what the film's problem is - for those with the perceptual wherewithal to read and comprehend it...

Go back and read my post to find the parts that have every appearance of having been disingenuously edited out.

 

 


How does one read the words of wisdom that were "disingenuously edited out"?


The issue is not reading - even the malignantly narcissistic psychopath demeaning the Oval office can do that - for a limited time period...

The issue is that conservatives cannot perceive reality as it actually is (Charles Manson can't either, can he?) and instead create an "alternate reality" like that of Kellyanne Conway and some conservative posters here who seem to specialise in inane juvenile persiflage...

 

That's because conservative cognitive dissonance prohibits logic and rationality.

 

Will Bill O'Reilly admit to himself that he caused his own problems?

 

Of course not.

 

Will certain conservative posters admit that their concept Marxism/Leninisn/Communism is being portrayed as a childish "monster under the bed"?

 

Of course not.

 

 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 22,121
Registered: ‎03-04-2009

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 336 of 396 (96 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

.Do you wish to engage in discussion or just play games?? Did you view the film, have you read the 10 planks of Maxism? If not, you are not ready to participate seriously.

 

BTW, I recently saw a lecture by our old Buddy Richard Wolff in which he saw a return to the glory days of the '30s coming. That was when the unions, the Socialists, and the Communists banded together to move FDR towards Socialism. The Progressive movement meets with his approval.


Oh Dear!!!!!!! I had forgotten, You have come back to your old way or responding. 
You posted a question and now are sending me back to the film?  if you really want to bring any kind of credibility do please answer my question, I will continue to request an answer. 
Enlighten us. what  part of progressivism is Marxism.?  I am sure that you know the answer, why is it so difficult to answer, please compare. both? and provide facts  on why they are both alike. 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 29,378
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 337 of 396 (93 Views)

pc6063 wrote:

oldrescout--Nice post!!  What is sad, is that Trump's proposed tax reform continues this discrepancy between the 1 and the 99%.  And yet, i repeatedly see some poor and middle class sing his praises.

Voting in ignornace is a huge part of why this country has such a disasterous and inept fool in the WH.

 

i have stated before, (I think, I've discussed this so often--God know why--) that Marxism has tenants of both parties, but, overall, marxism has nothing to do with the overall way in which America is run.  I do see more of the Repblican 'all for the rich, little for the worker' mentality in the tenants of Marxism than i do Dems.

 

 I suggest the novel Animal Farm, which used farm animals to show the disasterous results of Marxism.


Do I understand you correctly - take it from the worker and give it to the rich is Marxism???

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 29,378
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 338 of 396 (86 Views)

Quite a rant there. All the usual meaningless stuff about Oligarchs,Reagan tax scam, Uberrich but surely there was more to that BBC film than "puff-piece" and "delima".

 

But not addressed is the simple question of whether or not the Marxist planks are a significant part of the Progressive Movement.

 

Raving on and on about envy of the rich does not address an appropriate governmental and economic system. Although much of the raving does seem to tend towards "From each.....to each....".

 

The thing is - if one doesn't like how wealth is distributed by the free economy, what alternative is there but the above?

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 4,343
Registered: ‎01-24-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 339 of 396 (81 Views)

oldrescout--Nice post!!  What is sad, is that Trump's proposed tax reform continues this discrepancy between the 1 and the 99%.  And yet, i repeatedly see some poor and middle class sing his praises.

Voting in ignornace is a huge part of why this country has such a disasterous and inept fool in the WH.

 

i have stated before, (I think, I've discussed this so often--God know why--) that Marxism has tenants of both parties, but, overall, marxism has nothing to do with the overall way in which America is run.  I do see more of the Repblican 'all for the rich, little for the worker' mentality in the tenants of Marxism than i do Dems.

 

 I suggest the novel Animal Farm, which used farm animals to show the disasterous results of Marxism.

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 20,155
Registered: ‎11-09-2011

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 340 of 396 (78 Views)

The video is a nice puff-piece that glosses over the real delima for 21st Century America. It is NOT a question of Capitalism v Marxism because the "10 Planks of Marxism" that some pretend distinguish the two systems are currently part of Capitalism everywhere.

 

The question therefore is not how our economy should be organized - Capitalism wins hands down. the question is:  What happens to the profits that the system produces?

 

For 40 years, 1936-1976, American Capitalism created an ever-growing and ever more prosperous Middle Class, and then SOMETHING changed so the Middle Class, actually the bottom 99%, went into economic decline and all the benefits of the still increasing productivity and profits all went to the top 1%.

 

The "something" was the change in the Federal Income Tax code.

 

For 40 years, those at the very top paid 91% of every ADDITIONAL dollar they gave themselves to the Federal Government and 5% to State and Local Governments.

 

It really made no sense to raise their own incomes any faster than the tax brackets rose, so they gave themselves more "perks" - Corporate jets v 1st Class commercial, health insurance that paid whatever they desired for themselves and their families, "scholarships" for their children with scant regard for jr's academic prowess, longer vacations, huge blocks of company stock , and early retirement at very nearly their working salaries.

 

All that only required around 4% of the profit increases, so they gave the rest to the workers, whose incomes increased by 96% of the increases in worker productivity all during that 40 year period.

 

When the Reagan tax scam cut the TMR down to 28%, the 1% who has always been the ones dividing the profits, decided to keep all their perks AND give THEMSELVES all the profits accruing from increased worker productivity. this caused the portion of total personal income going to the 1% to skyrocket from less than 12% in 1980 to over 25% in 2016.

 

The AMOUNT of that increase in hoarded wealth is incredible. Total personal Income is $19 Trillion. Had the 40-year portion of 12% continued, the Uberrich 1% would've taken in $2.28 Trillion, or an average of $1,605,334. Instead, thanks entirely to the Reagan Scam, they kept 25%, or $4.75 Trillion. The difference that for 40 years had gone to the workers is $2.47 Trillion, an average of $17,394 for every worker making the average American wage not $56,000 but $74,000.

 

The housing market disaster was caused by a need to create investments for the trillions of dollars in surplus income the Uberrich and our trading partners had accumulated, but wonder of wonders, if the people who had wanted to buy a home, the additional $17,000/year in income would've made those "sub-prime" mortgages totally unnecessary because home buyers with sufficient income to qualify for a normal mortgage would've satisfied the demand for new mortgages.

To ice the cake, the additional $1.4 Trillion collected in Federal Income Taxes would've erassed the deficit and given a Trillion bucks every year back to the States to improve schools and maintain our outer infrasturcture.

 

Republican distortion of Capitalism as requiring no taxation of the rich has and will continue to create financial disasters that will be resolved by more and more tax funded bailouts and ever increasing income inequality.

 

So the question is "Do you want eternal economic growth and rising standards of living for all Americans, or do you want the Republican rush to an Oligarchy that will exceed the disasterous wealth inequality of Dickensian England that prompted Marx to write his Manifesto in the first place?"