A question for my Yankee neighbours

[Underhill]

Of course, authoritarian governments can exist under capitalism.
But under full blown socialism, authoritarian governments are the only type to emerge.
Fans of socialism have still yet to show any such regime with better news coverage than provided in countries rife us capitalist running dogs.

Sure, except there are very few people out there who want full blown socialism of the type you are talking about. Comparing what the left in this country want to socialism of that kind is a bit disingenuous.

 

[Wu Wei]

Sure, except there are very few people out there who want full blown socialism of the type you are talking about. Comparing what the left in this country want to socialism of that kind is a bit disingenuous.

I have a question: How do you define "full blown socialism"?

 

[Revoltingest]

And just to further how nuts Pence--the "Christian, Conservative, and Republican in that order"--actually is, he has even claimed that smoking doesn't kill, isn't linked to lung cancer, and dismissed such claims as "media and political hysteria."

I searched, & found the full op ed piece he wrote.
http://web.archive.org/web/20010415085348/http://mikepence.com/smoke.html
Looking at the mined quotes, it seems clear that he knows smoking is dangerous.
He even acknowledged indirectly that a third of smokers die from related maladies.
His claim that it "doesn't kill" appears to be an incompetent attempt to say that
it's dangerous, but is not a death sentence for every smoker.

Where has he said it "isn't linked to lung cancer"?

 

[Revoltingest]

Sure, except there are very few people out there who want full blown socialism of the type you are talking about. Comparing what the left in this country want to socialism of that kind is a bit disingenuous.

Be careful with the "disingenuous" charge.
From Dictionary.com.....
"lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere"
I'm being "false"?
Nah.....
I could say that I find it more disingenuous to sing the praises of "socialism" when in fact the
cited countries enjoy the fruits of capitalism. But I won't accuse you of such dishonesty.
There is room for reasonable people to disagree, & yet still be honest.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Where has he said it "isn't linked to lung cancer"?

http://web.archive.org/web/20010415085348/http://mikepence.com/smoke.html

We will hear about the scourge of tobacco and the resultant premature deaths. We will hear about how this phalanx of government elates has suddenly grown a conscience after decades of subsidizing the product which, we are now told, "kills millions of Americans each year"....
Despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn't kill. In fact, 2 out of every three smokers does not die from a smoking related illness and 9 out of ten smokers do not contract lung cancer.....
The relevant question is, what is more harmful to the nation, second hand smoke or back handed big government disguised in do-gooder healthcare rhetoric...
A government big enough to go after smokers is big enough to go after you.

Reminds me of Ayn Rand, who came to similar conclusion about smoking, and died from it herself. Yes, he did say smoking isn't good for you, but to downplay the elevated risks of heart disease, cancer, and death, it's an alarming thing to say.

 

[Revoltingest]

http://web.archive.org/web/20010415085348/http://mikepence.com/smoke.html

Reminds me of Ayn Rand, who came to similar conclusion about smoking, and died from it herself. Yes, he did say smoking isn't good for you, but to downplay the elevated risks of heart disease, cancer, and death, it's an alarming thing to say.

The quote doesn't show that he denies the link between smoking & lung cancer though.

Btw, I find his reasoning sketchy, & his writing unclear.

 

[Underhill]

Be careful with the "disingenuous" charge.
From Dictionary.com.....
"lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere"
I'm being "false"?
Nah.....
I could say that I find it more disingenuous to sing the praises of "socialism" when in fact the
cited countries enjoy the fruits of capitalism. But I won't accuse you of such dishonesty.
There is room for reasonable people to disagree, & yet still be honest.

I wasn't speaking of you in particular. But both sides have a tendency to do exactly what you are talking about with one big difference. When the left talks about socialism, they are talking about exactly the kind of socialism those countries enjoy. When the right tries to discredit the lefts socialism, they often have a tendency to start pulling out references to communism and other purely socialist societies.

 

[Revoltingest]

I wasn't speaking of you in particular. But both sides have a tendency to do exactly what you are talking about with one big difference. When the left talks about socialism, they are talking about exactly the kind of socialism those countries enjoy. When the right tries to discredit the lefts socialism, they often have a tendency to start pulling out references to communism and other purely socialist societies.

I find the right to be broader than that, criticizing even non-socialist (social welfare) measures as "socialist".
It's a way to demonize that which they oppose.

 

[Underhill]

I have a question: How do you define "full blown socialism"?

Modern western european socialism is essentially a bevy of social programs, free health care, strong unions, etc... but the government doesn't control business in general. Full blown socialism (my made up terminology) is when the government controls virtually everything as the USSR did during its hay day.

 

[Revoltingest]

Modern western european socialism is essentially a bevy of social programs, free health care, strong unions, etc... but the government doesn't control business in general. Full blown socialism (my made up terminology) is when the government controls virtually everything as the USSR did during its hay day.

I thought I made up "full blown socialism".
Rats!

 

[Underhill]

I thought I made up "full blown socialism".
Rats!

I'm sure someone made it up long before either of us. But since I have no idea who that was, I'll take credit for it in the meanwhile.

 

[Akivah]

I'm curious as to how many of you think that Donald trump and Hillary Clinton represent the best option for both parties after the conventions. Are these two the cream of the crop as far as the total potential candidates go?

Are you insane? Both candidates suck. I still question, how we ended up with these as our choices.

 

[Akivah]

Maybe we've earned the choices we've got. I feel betrayed by the normative Republicans that claimed that they would reduce the size of the government. Once elected, they don't do it. They only have these stupid FIVE year plans which show ALL the savings in the fifth year. Great....when they're not in office any more.

 

[Akivah]

I wish someone would apply the direct method to government instead of the indirect method. With the indirect method, a candidate says which parts of government they don't like and claim they will eliminate those. With the direct method, a candidate will say what a government is supposed to do, and then eliminate everything else. May we shrink the government in our days.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm sure someone made it up long before either of us. But since I have no idea who that was, I'll take credit for it in the meanwhile.

That's always the case, eh?
Seldom is anything new under the Sun.

 

[metis]

I wish someone would apply the direct method to government instead of the indirect method. With the indirect method, a candidate says which parts of government they don't like and claim they will eliminate those. With the direct method, a candidate will say what a government is supposed to do, and then eliminate everything else. May we shrink the government in our days.

I actually wish that some major t.v. station would be willing to take a chance and say they will no longer accept negative (anti-the other candidate's) ads. IOW, the candidates can only say what they intend to do and how they intend to do it.

 

[metis]

I still question, how we ended up with these as our choices.

"The people have spoken"-- democracy in action.

 

[Scott C.]

I'm curious as to how many of you think that Donald trump and Hillary Clinton represent the best option for both parties after the conventions. Are these two the cream of the crop as far as the total potential candidates go?

A quick google and fast calculation tells me there are about 135,000,000 US citizens between 35 and 75 years old. If those two candidates are the best we can get from that pool, we are really messed up.

 

[Akivah]

I actually wish that some major t.v. station would be willing to take a chance and say they will no longer accept negative (anti-the other candidate's) ads. IOW, the candidates can only say what they intend to do and how they intend to do it.

I did that just last night. I had three people to choose from on a county race. Two candidates smeared the other candidates on their websites. One candidate just listed all the goals they have for the position if they win. That's the one I selected.

 

[metis]

I did that just last night. I had three people to choose from on a county race. Two candidates smeared the other candidates on their websites. One candidate just listed all the goals they have for the position if they win. That's the one I selected.

And hopefully (s)he wins. Hey, I'm old-- er, more mature-- enough to remember that t.v. stations used to refuse to show negative ads, but somewhere along the line $ became much more important.

We used to be a country that went by the old English adage "It's not whether you win or lose but how you play the game", but now it's more Vince Lombardy's adage of "Show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser".