Does anyone feel like this is normal or acceptable?

[Stevicus]

It does.
When I ask anti-capitalists for a better or as good as alternative.
they come up short. You're not providing that alternative, but
rather a comparison between a primitive rural agricultural
peasant economy with a subsequent socialist one.

Ignoring the increased oppression & famine under the USSR,
you're still claiming that it's an improvement, but not that it's an
exemplary economic system. This is not the alternative I ask for.

So, basically, what you're asking for is an example of a country with a larger economy and a better standard of living than the United States. Well, not even most capitalist countries in the world today would be able to meet that standard.

And if you think that the U.S. has a large economy and a high standard of living due to capitalism, then I would say you need to study American history a little better.

 

[Revoltingest]

So, basically, what you're asking for is an example of a country with a larger economy....

No, not the size of the economy.

....and a better standard of living than the United States.

It's no single or couple features of a country.
Consider liberty, standard of living, religious freedom, speech freedom,
travel freedom, & whatever else matters to westerners.

Well, not even most capitalist countries in the world today would be able to meet that standard.

You're imposing an unreasonable basis for comparison.

And if you think that the U.S. has a large economy and a high standard of living due to capitalism, then I would say you need to study American history a little better.

Get'n personal, eh.
You might be far less learned than you believe.

It still seems that you, like other lefties, are evading my request
to offer an alternative to capitalism, ie, a non-capitalist country
which appeals to western wants & values....one not suffering
from wide oppression, famine, poverty, & authoritarian rule.

 

[Shad]

While perhaps technically true, I find your summary misleading. The main outcome of this ruling ha been to allow corporations to make huge contributions to political campaigns, and more or less "buy" politicians.

Unions do that too especially those in the government sector. Double-edge sword.

 

[Stevicus]

No, not the size of the economy.

It's no single or couple features of a country.
Consider liberty, standard of living, religious freedom, speech freedom,
travel freedom, & whatever else matters to westerners.

So, you're judging other countries by Western standards.

You're imposing an unreasonable basis for comparison.

No, that's what you're doing. I offered an example of a country which clearly showed improvement from what it previously had, but you keep saying that it's still not as good as the United States. That's unreasonable.

Get'n personal, eh.
You might be far less learned than you believe.

Well, at least I know that the wealth of this country was not conjured out of thin air solely due to the magic of an abstract "system." Whether you're aware of this, I'm not sure.

It still seems that you, like other lefties, are evading my request
to offer an alternative to capitalism, ie, a non-capitalist country
which appeals to western wants & values....one not suffering
from wide oppression, famine, poverty, & authoritarian rule.

There's no evasion here. No matter what examples may be presented to you, you're just going to dig up some excuse not to accept it just so you can claim "these darn lefties keep evading my request." That means that you're the one who is evading, not me.

 

[Revoltingest]

There's no evasion here. No matter what examples may be presented to you, you're just going to dig up some excuse not to.....

Criticizing my reaction to a response you won't provide, eh.
The only alternative you offered wasn't to capitalism. It was
praise for the USSR over a czarist peasant agricultural economy.

So many lefties decry capitalism. What's the alternative...socialism?
Where's the example they prefer....N Korea, Cuba, USSR, PRC?
They give me either no answer or cite a capitalist Scandinavian country.

 

[Stevicus]

Criticizing my reaction to a response you won't provide, eh.

Well, when you keep changing the parameters and the basis of comparison, it can get a bit annoying. You first asked for a "positive example" of socialism, which I provided. Now you're saying it has to be something that "appeals to Western wants and values" (which is extremely vague, but nevermind).

The only alternative you offered wasn't to capitalism. It was
praise for the USSR over a czarist peasant agricultural economy.

1. For all intents and purposes, it was capitalism, since it involved private property, ownership, and a class hierarchy. It certainly wasn't a socialist system.
2. Regardless of whether you agree with #1, socialism still improved the system.

So many lefties decry capitalism. What's the alternative...socialism?
Where's the example they prefer....N Korea, Cuba, USSR, PRC?
They give me either no answer or cite a capitalist Scandinavian country.

Socialism improved life in all of those countries over what they had before. If this pattern holds true, then socialism can be expected to greatly improve life in the United States, if such a system were implemented.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, when you keep changing the parameters.....

So that's your excuse.

 

[Stevicus]

So that's your excuse.

Excuse for what?

 

[oldbadger]

Off through the treetops with a different topic.

Just stop.

I did explain that thorough investigation in to Fat Cats stuffing their millions (billions) in to accounts on distant Islans (I mentioned Turks and Kako?) and you called that hyperbole?

Those accounts are offshore accounts.

And then you pointed me to the crisis in Venezuela?

And then you accused me of 'off through the tree-tops'?

If you could debate then you'd be dangerous.

 

[oldbadger]

Women....the worst mistake we ever made was letting them vote.

I wonder where @Mystic Sangha is?
Or that deadly Canadian member?

You'd be toast, Revolting. Toast.

 

[Revoltingest]

I wonder where @Mystic Sangha is?
Or that deadly Canadian member?

You'd be toast, Revolting. Toast.

Lightweights who couldn't take the heat.

 

[icehorse]

Unions do that too especially those in the government sector. Double-edge sword.

Unions' influence is a tiny fraction of corporations' influence. And, I'd say, unions are far, far more ethical than corporations.

 

[Audie]

I did explain that thorough investigation in to Fat Cats stuffing their millions (billions) in to accounts on distant Islans (I mentioned Turks and Kako?) and you called that hyperbole?

Those accounts are offshore accounts.

And then you pointed me to the crisis in Venezuela?

And then you accused me of 'off through the tree-tops'?

If you could debate then you'd be dangerous.

I even quoted examples of your emotive hyperbole,
so you are either losing it, or, losing it, as in reduced
to thrashing about like a foul hooked alligator trying
to bite something. ( Dangerous if one is so silly as
to ever give it a chance )

Your disingenuousness was all the last word that was
needed, really, even if I am by custom supposed to get
the last word.

 

[Audie]

Unions' influence is a tiny fraction of corporations' influence. And, I'd say, unions are far, far more ethical than corporations.

As long as you recognize that as just an "I'd say."

 

[Revoltingest]

And, I'd say, unions are far, far more ethical than corporations.

Ever worked in the auto industry?
That would be an eye opener.
Of the workers I've hired over the years, 2 of'm were enforcers for the union.
One only sabotaged things. The other, a body builder, would beat people.
When I had a project at GM Truck & Bus, I was warned that I wasn't allowed
to wake up any union workers sleeping on the job.
A contractor friend had to pay union officials for peace on his jobs.
Those are the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Shad]

Unions' influence is a tiny fraction of corporations' influence. And, I'd say, unions are far, far more ethical than corporations.

Wrong. Do not conflated money with influence.

 

[Audie]

Ever worked in the auto industry?
That would be an eye opener.
Of the workers I've hired over the years, 2 of'm were enforcers for the union.
One only sabotaged things. The other, a body builder, would beat people.
When I had a project at GM Truck & Bus, I was warned that I wasn't allowed
to wake up any union workers sleeping on the job.
A contractor friend had to pay union officials for peace on his jobs.
Those are the tip of the iceberg.

Labour racketeers.

 

[Revoltingest]

Labour racketeers.

Aye, it's a major problem, one which is a factor
in sending production south & even overseas.

 

[icehorse]

As long as you recognize that as just an "I'd say."

@Revoltingest

Some unions yes, some no. But overall, I'll stick with my claim that the corporate oligarchy is far, far, far more damaging to our society than unethical unions are.

 

[Revoltingest]

@Revoltingest

Some unions yes, some no. But overall, I'll stick with my claim that the corporate oligarchy is far, far, far more damaging to our society than unethical unions are.

My personal experience with & observations of unions & companies differs.
So we'll agree to disagree on that.
But let's find detente on the fight against corruption in both.