Socialism Pt 3: Socialism that trump loves

By the definitions we use for socialism this is 100% socialism. It’s welfare for farmers. One can argue it needs to be done etc etc but no matter how you slice it it’s socialism.

WRONG:

socialism
[ soh-shuh-liz-uh m ]

noun
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
 
tariff relief -especially since China targeted US farmers- is not "socialism" at all

socialism a buzzword, a dog whistle for conservatives

they gladly collect their SS, use Medicare extensively and are happy to receive food stamps the moment the cupboard goes bare

just a cudgel to beat liberals with

SS and Medicare are FORCED on us you fucking twat. Yeah, we shouldn't collect what we were FORCED to pay into programs we disagree with.

STFU you willful idiot. You're NEVER right about ANYTHING and have an IQ below room temp.
 
It is socialism. The Dept of Agriculture has welfare programs in place for most crops (and most farmers, whether they are corporations or not). These welfare programs buy the crops that people don't want, then destroy the crop. You are being taxed for this to happen. So are the other farmers. The government is stealing YOUR wealth to pay off unproductive farmers.

It does not meet the definition of socialism. While I disagree with the policy and think we should disband the entire Department of Agriculture, it is not Socialism.
 
It is keeping no one alive. Food stamp recipients are already alive. Food stamps changes none of that. But food stamps are socialism.

WELFARE is not Socialism.

socialism
[ soh-shuh-liz-uh m ]

noun
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
 
Again, any time Gov't involves itself in the economy it is socialistic, by definition, a City Fire Dept is socialistic, in fact, in the 19th Century some fire departments were privately owned

No "change of stance," fact

WRONG and a massive pile of Baloney. But you like Baloney don't you snowflake?
 
I have a bad feeling it's like a typical (R) tax cut -- the bulk goes to those who don't need it because they already have plenty, while the rest of us wait to be trickled down upon.

Are you the "decider" of who should be allowed to keep what they earn? This is the problem with Fascistic Marxist dogma; it presumes that elites know better how to spend our hard earned wealth than we do.

Centralized planning and thinking ALWAYS lead to failure, malaise and poverty.
 
Clinton + BJ = evil
Toadstool + multiple affairs = meh
Obama + "You can keep your doctor" = horrible liar
Toadstool + 10,000+ documented lies = meh
Obama + "Trayvon could have been my son" = racist divider
Toadstool + dozens of documented racist tweets, actions, and verbal statements = meh
Obama + economic recovery/rising markets = pure chance
Toadstool + rising markets = genius

giphy.gif
 
This is it, your last chance, there will be no other post by me about it..

So go head, give it a spin...:)

Give what a spin? The definition of socialism? That's easy, government ownership of the means of production. As in, nationalizing industry. You're welcome.
 
I do recall, & you are 100% correct, trump.......

socialism, debt, killing someone on 5th ave, he can do no wrong..

What socialism has Trump implemented?
Trump has no power over the debt. The House does. See Articles I and II of the Constitution of the United States.
Who did he kill on 5th ave? In what city?
 
What socialism has Trump implemented?
Trump has no power over the debt. The House does. See Articles I and II of the Constitution of the United States.
Who did he kill on 5th ave? In what city?

If you don't actually know what that is a reference to, it's really to late to tell you....... Have a nice day.:)
 
Again, any time Gov't involves itself in the economy it is socialistic, by definition, a City Fire Dept is socialistic, in fact, in the 19th Century some fire departments were privately owned

No "change of stance," fact

No, it is not socialistic by definition. Socialism is government interference and direction of an economy. Fire departments are a public service, they are not an economy. People either contribute to a private fire department, or levy taxes upon themselves to fund them.
 
WRONG:

socialism
[ soh-shuh-liz-uh m ]

noun
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

A reasonably accurate description, except I would use the word 'or' instead of 'and'. It's about the control of production of distribution, either by direct ownership (communism), or just control (fascism).
 
No, it is not socialistic by definition. Socialism is government interference and direction of an economy. Fire departments are a public service, they are not an economy. People either contribute to a private fire department, or levy taxes upon themselves to fund them.

Not true, not restricted to government interference, different people will have always have different definitions of what is interference, it is government involvement, as Smith would say, a government fire dept limits the invisible hand's role in someone making a profit off of fire fighting
 
Back
Top