and so is Obama.
Printable View
and so is Obama.
Yes we can
Just like Obama said.
Next thing you know they will call me a Communist for sharing my toys when I was in kindergarten. :)
how is this communism?
the economy is in **** now. the country has to move forward together or it will never recover. and so his tax plans make the most economic sense
lol, people in America throw around the term communism like nothing when in reality they wouldnt recognize communism or socialism if it was shoved down their throats.
LOL. they would notice, lots of americans tend to be egoists.
Yet we're ok with partially nationalizing failing banks...Quote:
LOL. they would notice, lots of americans tend to be egoists.
And no, Americans would not notice it. They didn't notice the not so subtle redistribution of wealth to the top 1% in this country, and wouldn't have called Obama's plans of reversing that abomination socialism if the talking point wasn't shoved down their throats by McCain and Palin. They also didn't notice that Palin's support and expansion of the oil revenue sharing program in Alaska is a hell of a lot closer to socialism than anything Obama has proposed. (at least in the sense of the term that they like to fling around) She paraded that around the came trail while at the same time blabbering about Obama leading us to a socialist state!
Ok, so Sarah Palin is a complete moron who really isn't smarter than a 5th grader, so by all means don't take her word for it. Here's McSame's view on taxes from a Q&A in the 2000 Republican primary:
And that's McCain fighting the liberal defense of progressive taxation. There's also a fiscal argument to be made, but it's clear he's ok with the 'spreading the wealth' idea that they now harp on...Quote:
Audience member: "Why is it that someone like my father who goes to school for 13 years gets penalized in a huge tax bracket because he's a doctor."
McCain: "I think it's to some degree because we feel obviously that wealthy people can afford more."
Audience member: "Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism?"
McCain: "Here's what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there's nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."
Ok, Ok, so that's old news. That was from his 'mavericky' days and since then he's had to about-face on a lot in order to appeal to all parts of the base. Then how about this simple nugget: progressive taxation is not socialism.
So, no, Americans do not know socialism from a hole in the wall...
Did government force Obama to share his toys?Quote:
Originally Posted by Swirvin' Birds
Did government force Obama to give away his toys?
By the way, income tax as done by at least the USA government is communist.
Therefore making Barack Obama's tax plan communist.
Progressive tax is also communist.
"No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."
US Constitution article I section X Paragraph IV
Amendment XVI is communist, it was added in 1913 and amends article I section X paragraph IV.
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Amendment XVI
"A heavy progressive or graduated income tax."
"Communist Manifesto" 2nd plank
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
Karl Marx
Amendment 16 is fully legal, and should be treated as such.
From each according to his/her abilities to finance every failing company in the US plus pay for the government's mistakes.
*Wonder what Karl Marx would have to say about that.*
I just think it's funny. He wasn't far off the truth there. :)Quote:
Did government force Obama to share his toys?
Did government force Obama to give away his toys?
Go live in China and then cry Communism. Notice the dirt poor working class and the rich bankers they have. Seems the way Republicans like it to me...
at least socialize health care. I really don't want to pay for someone else's cancer, but I don't want to see another die of it. Especially because they don't have money. I thought this was the country of Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton, where it was about freedom
dka
as i told you in the other thread, even if it was on a slightly different matter: you are wrong.
if usa was communist there would be no tax because you wouldnt own anything or earn anything.. no income no property no juicy bank accounts no inheritance and NO TAX.
yes, thats right. No tax. does that make people wanting tax cuts communist too? :O
(after all, thats the level of reasoning you seem to want to maintain.. )
Quote:
Originally Posted by RAKIdaRHINO
Than I guess Karl Marx the founder of communism doesn't know what communism is.
I guess that also means the Soviet Union didn't tax it's people either.
That would make China, Cuba, etc. not communist.
That would also make the communist manifesto, not communist.
no, they were never truly communist, they had communist ambitions and took somewhat different paths (market economy for instance) to achieve their end goal of a truly communist state but neither got there..
in marxs utopia there wouldnt be any money to pay taxes with and there would be no states to collect taxes.. secondly there would be no classes and total equality and thus 0 need for redistribution..
Than they are socialists.
communists are socialist too..
marx said socialism is the path to communism.
as i said communism is socialist, and marx was a socialist. no surprise there really. whats your point? america is hardly socialist, nor is obamas politics.. more socialist than mccains? probably, but hardly enough to classify it as socialist..
Why does Obama's, Mccain's, USA's policies matchup with the Communist Manifesto's ten planks than?
well, they dont.. i dont know if you know nothing about marxism or american politics or perhaps both, but as i said, theres hardly anything socialist about america today with or without mccain/obama.
whats relevant is the purpose and end goal, not the action itself. as i said, even capitalism can be used as a stepping stone towards a communist society, so does that mean capitalism is communist too? If all actions potentially can be a stepping stone towards communism, does that mean that every leader and every country in the world is communist?
1. "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes."
Federal government owns at least 40% of United states land.
Property tax,
2. "A heavy progressive or graduated income tax."
amendment XVI, IRS, progressive tax.
3. "Abolition of all rights of inheritance."
Inheritance tax
4. "Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels."
Heros Act
5. "Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly."
Federal Reserve, no true audit.
6. "Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state."
Federal communications commission, and its federal guidelines
7. "Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan."
Federal government has more than 25,000 corporate units that directly compete with non government businesses.
8. "equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture."
9. "Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country."
10. "Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc."
State run schools, religion prayer etc. not allowed in schools.
All quotes are the Communist Manifesto's ten planks of communism
Karl Marx was just trying to sell the idea of socialism to people by making it sound good.Quote:
Originally Posted by RAKIdaRHINO
what is really the intention is to stay in that so called transitionary phase.
I will probably elaborate on the ten planks later.
But this explanation is hints for now.
dka
1. So? is the state increasing its ownership, and if so why? Thats the relevant question here, not whether or not state owns property in first place.
2. taxes arent needed since there is no money. secondly taxes themselves are hardly as relevant as what taxes are used for. monarchs of the past along with the nobles collected heavy taxes, were they socialist/communist? Hardly. tax != socialism/communism. Get your facts straight.
3. rights of inheritance != inheritance tax. As i said in the other thread there couldnt be no inheritance tax since you couldnt inherit in first place. You own nothing as such you cant inherit anything either. Thirdly the underlyings reasons are miles a part. Where as the marxist acknowledges that inheritance maintains the class society one by having inheritance taxes doesnt necessarily want to remove these classes.. furthermore there are plenty of countries far more socialist than what you claim US to be that has removed inheritance tax.. does that make them less socialist than US? Weird reasoning.
4. Duh, no one is supposed to have property in first place. Thats the whole idea.
5. Fed and the american banking system is hardly socialist.
6. How much of your lovely communication is currently state owned? What is the trend?
Is America privatizing more or nationalizing more? :)
7. Wow. Not worth commenting..
8. didnt have anything to say?
9. read above.
10. Yeah, cause only the socialist think education is a good idea. Okelidokeli!
It also help to read between the lines when reading Karl Marx, Lenin, etc.
Karl Marx tries to make Communism sound good when it is not.
dka
It is good. Compared to capitalism at least.. then again, since capitalism have/and can been used as a stepping stone towards communism, capitalism IS communism so.. nevermind.Quote:
Karl Marx was just trying to sell the idea of socialism to people by making it sound good.
What makes you think that? Kinda beats the whole purpose.Quote:
what is really the intention is to stay in that so called transitionary phase.
dka
why is it bad? why is capitalism good?
What is good? What is bad?
Whats bad about the idea of everyone having everything they need compared to the elite having everything while the workers pay for it?
Oy... Here's an interesting read.Quote:
2. "A heavy progressive or graduated income tax."
amendment XVI, IRS, progressive tax.
http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/article/...175910,00.html
Reminder: Obama's tax plan involves returning to Clinton-era levels, or 39.6% for the top tier. Look at the historical data and I think it will be fairly obvious why all those arguing that Obama will bring about communism in the US are just right-wing tools peddling their desperate talking points...
As for the other ones.. The inheritance tax has been covered. The fact that there is an inheritance to tax kills that one... And this next one covers a few; having a federal regulatory body does not qualify as 'centralization.' What is meant is that ONLY the state outlets exist. Ie- state media, state banks, etc being the only available option.
And my favorite...
Is child labor desirable? I didn't realize the abolition of child labor was something we, as a capitalist society, should be against... Also, the arguments regarding religion and prayer in public schools go back to something that predates Marx...Quote:
10. "Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc."
State run schools, religion prayer etc. not allowed in schools.
well, rhino, retard comes to mind..."Whats bad about the idea of everyone having everything they need compared to the elite having everything while the workers pay for it?"
I'd like to introduce to you my good friend, "REALITY". What's wrong with your dumb statement is "reality". The "workers" don't "pay for it" because THEY ARE PAID. The "elite" as you phrase it, PAYS the workers. You see, the "workers" aren't smart enough to be anything but - i.e they don't "produce" the jobs, they just "do" them. The "elite" are what smart people call "producers". They "Create" jobs with their ideas that your "workers" WORK.
I had respect for you. Now I don't. Shut up and just comment on strats and Dark elves vs. Humans. Don't over-reach - like now.
dka is so dumb that he ignores history and reality - history has already provided a lesson in failure. What kind of idiot keeps touching the stove to make sure it's not hot? I know! Europeans....don't worry, the US will save you again.....it's our duty to rescue idiots....again...and again....etc
The USA doesn't touch the hot stove repeatedly either? lol
There are many different forms of Socialism. Marx abhorred them all. He did not do it to make his idea "sound nice" In fact his was the most radical.
Btw Europeans... Its not every Americans fault for our ignorance of what Socialism/Communism entails. You may remember that we were in a Cold War, and our textbooks in our schools reflect that. They skim over nationalization, (if you're lucky), then they subtly bash every ideal by pointing to the ex-USSR. After hearing about how evil it is since you turn 12, many Americans don't feel a need to really learn it. I only know about it because my mom was a Russian History major.
Ex: I talked to a guy at a party with a Confederate Flag on his hat, so I asked him why he wore it. He said Because he wished the south won the Civil War. When asked why, he had no answer. I asked him which party he liked. He said "Republican. Democrat's are pussies." I asked what his ideal government was and he said approximately, "I think everyone should work and do their part for society, and get in return: food, shelter, and maybe some beer on the weekends." When I informed him he was a Communist he started screaming and tried to fight me.
You realize Marx was a big promoter of Capitalism too, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by SnuggleySoft
Which makes you just as qualified and informed as her. Because my father is a nuclear pharmacist, I am now a reliable source on all things related?Quote:
Originally Posted by SnuggleySoft
Also, did she even graduate? What were her grades like?
Your random survey with a large sample population proves your point very well.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnuggleySoft
No, I mean that she has a library collection of texts and essays on Marxism, Leninism, Bakuninism and Political Ideology, which I read myself. If I had only used my high school texts, I wouldn't have known.
He said he supported Capitalism insofar as it released us from the reigns of Monarchy. He believed that our political systems progressed. He disagreed with the fact that labor itself raised the cost of goods and that the laborers did not recieve the part of the profit that was gained through their labor. He disliked the alienization that arouse from industry. Communist Manifesto has critiques of all the other socialist systems. There were opposing camps in Socialism, and Marx was of the camp that socialist reforms was the wrong way to do it, and it needed more radical changes.
Also, that's my most radical example. I thought it was a funny story. I didn't think it was a scientific piece of evidence. I know the dangers of following the fallacy of anecdotal evidence. However, notice how Obama was called a Marxist for an increase in the top marginal rate of the progressive tax, and a huge amount believed he was. Now tell me that's not ignorant?
lol crappy high school then. I spent a whole semester in high school learning about Marx.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnuggleySoft
I am not sure about that. It was more of a support as a necessary step to communism, and in the process it brought about many great benefits and advances for society.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnuggleySoft
How is it ignorant? One of the demands of Marx in his Communist manifesto was to have a progressive income tax! Who is the ignorant one here?Quote:
Originally Posted by SnuggleySoft
It was considered one of the best high schools in my state, but then again its a ****ty state for education. haha.
I agree with what you said about his support for capitalism. I was just saying that Marx wanted to get rid of capitalism since he believed it had done much of its purpose and believed we were ready to move the next step to a worker's democracy, and then a stateless egalitarian society.
Progressive income tax is "Bourgeoisie Socialism" I believe. But maybe your right. My friend stole my copy, and I need to find another. xD I'll try and look it up to make sure.
I believe in John Rawls theory of the "veil of ignorance", and I think anyone would have to as well. Or at least 2/3's apparently...
fun fact: http://www2.law.columbia.edu/news/su...on/index.shtml
2/3 of Americans Believe "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" was or could have been written by the framers and included in the Constitution, according to a nationwide survey commissioned by Columbia Law School.
Also I think I put in another post the marginal tax rate of the past. Reagan, Nixon, Kennedy, and Eisenhower were some HUUUGE Marxists... >_>
*On the veil of Ignorance:
I kind of over-reached when I said anyone would. I know the ideological arguments against it. What I meant was that I have a hard time imagining anything besides possibly a small majority, (possiby some gambling folks), to disagree with it if the veil were to actually exist.
Newark
i replied to you in private.. do as you please with my comment, i wont comment in this thread anymore..
snuggleysoft
even though marx may have "abhorred" socialism (or the other forms of it) wouldnt you agree with me on that it was mainly due to his disbelief in their view on how to achieve the end goal rather than the end goal itself? Communism to me seems pretty much like Socialism 2.0 with a radical twist. Then again im not an expert on the subject.
for everyone else:
i dont love communism, i just dont think capitalism is any better..
they both have pros and cons.. unfortunately you cant have both..
thats why i dont like either of them in particular..