|
 Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson 
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
|
Quote:
So now you're saying that there are people who don't work, and that it is not voluntary?
I thought you said working or not was "entirely voluntary".
Now you're deliberately being difficult.
able to and unable to.
Are you able but not willing?
or are you able and willing?
Or are you unable but willing and unable and unwilling.
The only people who can claim unable and unwilling are the disabled.
those that can claim unable and willing are young people.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
 
Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 8,928
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 24 minutes, 3 seconds
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
Just them?
Have you not seen the Americans cheering on a resurgence of the cold war?
I'd rather work with Russia than against them.
This email and constant Russia-baiting isn't helping that.
But I'd rather work against North Korea than with them.
Hence the need for sustained budget and you don't know what's around the corner.
I don't think the budget needs to get bigger, per se, but it shouldn't be shrunk either.
I think the U.S military is too highly geared toward unconventional warfare like in Iraq/Afghanistan and should focus more on modernized combined arms fighting.
I also hope the U.S has a diplomatic plan for the competing factions in Iraq and Syria, I don't see the kurds willingly giving up their land to Iraq when ISIS falls and I don't see the Syrian government standing either.
Also given Turkeys new.... government policy...
there's reason to be anxious in 2017 and beyond.
I agree with nearly everything here.
I think if we stopped overthrowing stable governments in the middle east, not only would that give us less reason to be anxious but it could free up hundreds of billions of federal dollars for things like healthcare and education and infrastructure.
I agree with that and also insert "paying off and funding" foreign governments i.e.the millions we gave Lybia
--------------------
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
Edited by SirTripAlot (05/28/17 09:12 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US 
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
 Re: Why Socialism?  [Re: Cinnamon] 1
#24357924 - 05/29/17 12:54 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I NEVER made the argument that the Soviet Union performed better than the US, or that it was a utopia. I said "it wasn't that bad". Perhaps now that you know you've lost that argument, you're changing the bar big time.
Your document actually shows things weren't all that bad in the Soviet Union.
doesn't make the soviet union 'good' or 'not that bad' it made it lucky to exist at the right time of a world war that gave them massive manufacturing ability.
the same document also points how, even with more land, manpower and comparable climate in peak growing seasons, the USSR still couldn't match U.S agriculture.
Once again, I didn't say they matched the US. No country in the world matched the US, not even capitalist countries. That doesn't mean all other countries in the world sucked.
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Nothing you said makes the soviet union 'not bad'.
Your point sucks and so did the USSR.
It sucked.
say it with me
SUCKED.
I already told you "I'm sure you know that everyone had free housing, free education, free healthcare, a job, plenty of food, etc."
So tell me something specific about the downsides. Not "it sucked under Stalin", not "the US was better", not "it sucked because I say it sucked".
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I NEVER made the argument that the Soviet Union performed better than the US, or that it was a utopia. I said "it wasn't that bad". Perhaps now that you know you've lost that argument, you're changing the bar big time.
Your document actually shows things weren't all that bad in the Soviet Union.
doesn't make the soviet union 'good' or 'not that bad' it made it lucky to exist at the right time of a world war that gave them massive manufacturing ability.
the same document also points how, even with more land, manpower and comparable climate in peak growing seasons, the USSR still couldn't match U.S agriculture.
Once again, I didn't say they matched the US. No country in the world matched the US, not even capitalist countries. That doesn't mean all other countries in the world sucked.
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Nothing you said makes the soviet union 'not bad'.
Your point sucks and so did the USSR.
It sucked.
say it with me
SUCKED.
I already told you "I'm sure you know that everyone had free housing, free education, free healthcare, a job, plenty of food, etc."
So tell me something specific about the downsides. Not "it sucked under Stalin", not "the US was better", not "it sucked because I say it sucked".
Dude, just because they provide something free doesn't inherently make it good.
The healthcare was bad.
The education, about typical.
a job, sure everyone employed, majority in agriculture, but labor productivity was incredibly low comparatively, 90% of adults in the workforce compared to 73% in the U.S.
Still didn't match U.S productivity, and worker moral was significantly low.
So yay, you have a job, but you have to push this plow not be a pilot or whatever you might actually want to do, yay communism!
Plenty of food.
Ah yes, plenty of high-starch food, some bread, some potato maybe some soup, can't complain, if you complain, off to gulag.
Now stand in this long ass line in the cold and wait for your food like a bum at a soup kitchen, the struggle is temporary Utopia is coming.
Doesn't sound as delightful when you actually look at the quality of life people had comparatively, not that you care.
You just want to be able to say "Everything was free" therefore it was better or even justifiable as a system.
But I expect you'll railroad past this with some dopey excuses because you know people who want to go back.
How did you even start this meme of 'it wasn't that bad'?
is it just to be contrarian?
|
 demiu5
humans, lol
Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said:
here is an interesting recent exchange between Elizabeth Warren and Steve Mnuchin
what a douchebag (Mnuchin)
--------------------
channel your inner Larry David
|
BlueMillionMiles
Heavily Metaled
Registered: 03/12/16
Posts: 247
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon]
#24358353 - 05/29/17 08:18 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Dude, just because they provide something free doesn't inherently make it good.
The healthcare was bad.
The education, about typical.
a job, sure everyone employed, majority in agriculture, but labor productivity was incredibly low comparatively, 90% of adults in the workforce compared to 73% in the U.S.
Still didn't match U.S productivity, and worker moral was significantly low.
So yay, you have a job, but you have to push this plow not be a pilot or whatever you might actually want to do, yay communism!
Plenty of food.
Ah yes, plenty of high-starch food, some bread, some potato maybe some soup, can't complain, if you complain, off to gulag.
Now stand in this long ass line in the cold and wait for your food like a bum at a soup kitchen, the struggle is temporary Utopia is coming.
Doesn't sound as delightful when you actually look at the quality of life people had comparatively, not that you care.
You just want to be able to say "Everything was free" therefore it was better or even justifiable as a system.
But I expect you'll railroad past this with some dopey excuses because you know people who want to go back.
How did you even start this meme of 'it wasn't that bad'?
is it just to be contrarian?
--------------------
Intellectual property & copyright laws took care of the privileged few, while we just pay more for less shit, have no privacy, and can't scratch our ass without a follow-up targeted ad for over-priced hemorrhoid cream.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon] 1
#24358798 - 05/29/17 11:42 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Dude, just because they provide something free doesn't inherently make it good.
I never said free was 'inherently good'. But it's not inherently bad either. All things being equal, I'll take 'free' over unaffordable any day.
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
The healthcare was bad.
Because you say so? You can't convince me with unsupported generalities. If you have statistics, post them and I'll likely accept them or explain why I don't. If you have witness accounts from people who lived there, post them. I know dozens of ex Soviet people now living in the United States, all of whom say the healthcare in the Soviet Union was good. If you don't believe me, here's one of many accounts of people who posted their experience online:
Quote:
My mother had frequent migraines. For many years, we called an ambulance usually at least once a month, sometimes more often, to help her with painkillers. Had we had to pay each time (like I have to in the USA with a co-pay, IF I have insurance costing $10k/y for a family), we probably would have gone bankrupt or she would have died sooner.
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
a job, sure everyone employed... but worker moral was significantly low.
So yay, you have a job, but you have to push this plow not be a pilot or whatever you might actually want to do, yay communism!
You already lost that discussion in the "Why are communists so awful?" thread. The fact is that the Soviet Union DOES have pilots, and those jobs go to the most qualified people, just as they do in the US and all other countries. The FACT is that in the US "70% of those surveyed in a recent Gallup poll either hate their jobs or are completely disengaged, and not even incentives and extras can extricate them from the working man's blues."
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
"Plenty of food"
Ah yes, plenty of high-starch food, some bread, some potato maybe some soup, can't complain, if you complain, off to gulag.
Now stand in this long ass line in the cold and wait for your food like a bum at a soup kitchen, the struggle is temporary Utopia is coming.
How many times do I have to tell you that I know communism sucked under Stalin during WWII? You've failed over and over again to show it was bad after Stalin, and I think you're not intelligent enough to continue this discussion because it always goes back to "but durrr, it sucked under Stalin!"
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Doesn't sound as delightful when you actually look at the quality of life people had comparatively, not that you care.
You just want to be able to say "Everything was free" therefore it was better or even justifiable as a system.
But I expect you'll railroad past this with some dopey excuses because you know people who want to go back.
If you can back up your claims that quality of life was bad, please do, but so far you haven't provided any facts, statistics, or anecdotes other than a report that said the US was generally better in many areas. Which I never disagreed with. But the US was generally better in the 70's than most countries, communist or not.
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
|
Falcon, you're just being silly now.
Everything I said is in the CIA report.
Nothing I said was in reference to USSR under Stalin, I know you're anal about that.
At a certain point you're going to have to accept that every historians account of the Soviet Union and every official analysis of it is actually true and not some capitalist conspiracy.
The U.S has problems, but the USSR had more, that's just a simple fact.
This is a worthless discussion with you because you dance around everything..
"B-b-b-but American's hate their jobs too!"
"b-b-b-b-but they had free healthcare who cares about the quality!"
"b-b-b-but the U.S was better in the 70's! therefore nothing bad can be measured against it!"
yawn, just admit you think the Soviet Union was great.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire
Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 36,014
Loc: 'Merica 
Last seen: 4 hours, 38 minutes
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon] 3
#24359942 - 05/29/17 07:39 PM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I dont even think he was suggesting its better than the US but ok 
The only reason its even a topic of discussion is because conservatives are like wives who love to bring up the time you called her a cunt when it comes to the USSR and socialism.
Every single time socialism is discussed, we need a 15 page preamble on the horrors of stalinism.
--------------------
|
Cyrus19
Represents Enlil's Hope
Registered: 02/24/17
Posts: 2,503
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
I dont even think he was suggesting its better than the US but ok
The only reason its even a topic of discussion is because conservatives are like wives who love to bring up the time you called her a cunt when it comes to the USSR and socialism.
Every single time socialism is discussed, we need a 15 page preamble on the horrors of stalinism.
Yes it's an absurd comparison to say the least. Most American progressives I won't call them leftists because no mainstream American politician supports state control of the economy. They simply want a safety net for the poor that won't be destroyed by free market fanatics. Capitalism is robust it functions just fine if you have things like food stamps disability payments and fair labor laws. I dare say it functions better since you don't have a starving underclass who is desperate.
|
Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
I dont even think he was suggesting its better than the US but ok
The only reason its even a topic of discussion is because conservatives are like wives who love to bring up the time you called her a cunt when it comes to the USSR and socialism.
Every single time socialism is discussed, we need a 15 page preamble on the horrors of stalinism.
I never like to pull out the socialist card on every policy a lefty wants.
but it's disingenuous pretending the USSR 'wasn't that bad', and then dismissing comparisons with the USSR and the U.S 'Because everyone was bad compared to the U.S in the 70's' it's a meme argument that's designed to be circular.
If you're going to claim one thing is bad one thing is good, you need to compare like with like, given the sheer resources and man power available to the USSR there is no reason they should have been worse than the U.S in the 70's other than their inefficient doctrine.
If you hadn't noticed we're talking post-Stalin.
There is no such thing as a socialist country as successful as safe free capitalist countries.
|
Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cyrus19]
#24360032 - 05/29/17 08:21 PM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cyrus19 said:
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
I dont even think he was suggesting its better than the US but ok
The only reason its even a topic of discussion is because conservatives are like wives who love to bring up the time you called her a cunt when it comes to the USSR and socialism.
Every single time socialism is discussed, we need a 15 page preamble on the horrors of stalinism.
Yes it's an absurd comparison to say the least. Most American progressives I won't call them leftists because no mainstream American politician supports state control of the economy. They simply want a safety net for the poor that won't be destroyed by free market fanatics. Capitalism is robust it functions just fine if you have things like food stamps disability payments and fair labor laws. I dare say it functions better since you don't have a starving underclass who is desperate.
Starvation isn't something that occurs under capitalism.
if people are starving then you're not producing enough food, which means you're not selling to a much larger market.
Take the Dutch industrial capitalist era, starvation is rife.
then they worked out how to grow crops more efficiently to take advantage of the higher food prices and demand.
Once the prices came down because they produced more, they doubled up on their production to make up for the lower food costs.
then you end up with obesity killing more people than starvation, which, tbh, is probably better.
Disability - sure.
Food stamps - No.
Fair labor - sure.
|
demiu5
humans, lol
Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon] 3
#24360345 - 05/29/17 10:49 PM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Starvation isn't something that occurs under capitalism.
--------------------
channel your inner Larry David
|
Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: demiu5]
#24360391 - 05/29/17 11:11 PM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
demiu5 said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Starvation isn't something that occurs under capitalism.
Where's the starvation?
Find me all the dead American's dying from starvation.
I can find you millions dying from obesity.
I feel like you've convinced yourself America is so awful and capitalism so heartless you're unable to look around and see how good everything is.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon] 1
#24360543 - 05/30/17 12:24 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Ah yes, plenty of high-starch food, some bread, some potato maybe some soup, can't complain, if you complain, off to gulag.
Now stand in this long ass line in the cold and wait for your food like a bum at a soup kitchen, the struggle is temporary Utopia is coming.
How many times do I have to tell you that I know communism sucked under Stalin during WWII? You've failed over and over again to show it was bad after Stalin, and I think you're not intelligent enough to continue this discussion because it always goes back to "but durrr, it sucked under Stalin!"
Falcon, you're just being silly now.
Everything I said is in the CIA report.
Nothing I said was in reference to USSR under Stalin, I know you're anal about that.
Ok, I'll make you a deal. Show me where the CIA report says people are limited to "high-starch food, some bread, some potato maybe some soup". Show me where it says "if you complain, off to the gulag". Show me where it says people "stand in this long ass line in the cold and wait for food". If you do, I'll give you a five shroom rating. If you can't you're clearly just lying. I'll even help you by pointing you to the "DIET" section on page 62 of the CIA report:
Quote:
DIET
Food is perhaps the brightest area in the comparative living standards picture. In 1981 the daily caloric level of the Soviet diet nearly matched that of the United States. Soviets consumed more starchy staples than Americans, but the gap had narrowed somewhat. Meanwhile, more livestock products were available; per capita consumption of meat increased 40 percent during 1970-82, although Soviet citizens on average still ate only half as much meat as Americans. Soviet per capita protein levels nonetheless nearly matched US levels. Protein in the Soviet food supply increased from one-third to one-half, and recommended daily per capita caloric levels in the USSR were exceeded. The Soviet levels are higher than the US recommended caloric allowances for adults.
Nevertheless, the large Soviet demand for quality foods remains unmet. Because output of these quality foods is insufficient and state retail prices are low in relation to money incomes, long queues and informal rationing are widespread. In some places, the authorities have invoked a mild form of rationing limiting the purchases of certain foods by state store customers.
The excess demand for quality foods is reflected in prices at collective farm markets (CFMs), where individuals sell surplus from their private plots and where prices vary according to supply and demand. Prices paid in CFMs are on average more than double the state retail prices. Part of the price difference reflects the superior quality of the products sold in CFMs, and part reflects supply-demand imbalances that have put considerable upward pressure on free market prices.
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
This is a worthless discussion with you because you dance around everything..
"B-b-b-but American's hate their jobs too!"
"b-b-b-b-but they had free healthcare who cares about the quality!"
Wrong.
You claimed Americans can do whatever job they like, and I proved that 70% of Americans hate their jobs.
You said Soviet healthcare sucks, but failed to show the quality was that bad.
I'm really interested in seeing where that CIA report (or any other report for that matter) backs any of your claims up. 
--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
TNK
Pleasures of Africa
 
Registered: 01/30/10
Posts: 14,237
Loc: I AM THUNDERBOT
Last seen: 21 days, 16 hours
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon] 1
#24360619 - 05/30/17 01:43 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Quote:
demiu5 said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Starvation isn't something that occurs under capitalism.
Where's the starvation?
Find me all the dead American's dying from starvation.
I can find you millions dying from obesity.
I feel like you've convinced yourself America is so awful and capitalism so heartless you're unable to look around and see how good everything is.
You know America isn't the only capitalistic country rite? You know people have starved to death here before, rite?
The great depression, people did starve. There are also many other countries around the world that are capitalistic and have improvised people dying from poverty and starvation, rite?
You are the one who is focusing on 'Merica' in this conversation and ignoring many other nations. There are a great number of states where capitalism has failed them and their people, sometimes even their sovereignty. The same way communism has done the same.
And don't get it twisted, I'm not defending the ussr or communism but you are being very obtuse and narrow minded to say something such as "people don't starve under capitalism", its a gross generalisation and a wrong one at that.
--------------------
Edited by TNK (02/22/22 22:22 PM)
|
Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: TNK]
#24360794 - 05/30/17 04:43 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
TNK said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Quote:
demiu5 said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Starvation isn't something that occurs under capitalism.
Where's the starvation?
Find me all the dead American's dying from starvation.
I can find you millions dying from obesity.
I feel like you've convinced yourself America is so awful and capitalism so heartless you're unable to look around and see how good everything is.
You know America isn't the only capitalistic country rite? You know people have starved to death here before, rite?
The great depression, people did starve. There are also many other countries around the world that are capitalistic and have improvised people dying from poverty and starvation, rite?
You are the one who is focusing on 'Merica' in this conversation and ignoring many other nations. There are a great number of states where capitalism has failed them and their people, sometimes even their sovereignty. The same way communism has done the same.
And don't get it twisted, I'm not defending the ussr or communism but you are being very obtuse and narrow minded to say something such as "people don't starve under capitalism", its a gross generalisation and a wrong one at that.
In which safe capitalist country are people starving?
|
Cinnamon
Stranger
Registered: 03/09/12
Posts: 865
Loc: Nelson
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
|
Inability to understand sarcasm?
Quote:
Nevertheless, the large Soviet demand for quality foods remains unmet. Because output of these quality foods is insufficient and state retail prices are low in relation to money incomes, long queues and informal rationing are widespread. In some places, the authorities have invoked a mild form of rationing limiting the purchases of certain foods by state store customers.
Quote:
Soviets consumed more starchy staples than Americans, but the gap had narrowed somewhat. Meanwhile, more livestock products were available; per capita consumption of meat increased 40 percent during 1970-82, although Soviet citizens on average still ate only half as much meat as Americans.
Quote:
You claimed Americans can do whatever job they like, and I proved that 70% of Americans hate their jobs.
How does that prove they can't choose their occupation?
Perhaps they chose the occupation but don't enjoy doing it for a number of reasons?
Quote:
You said Soviet healthcare sucks, but failed to show the quality was that bad
Say it with me: S.U.C.K.E.D
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire
Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 36,014
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 4 hours, 38 minutes
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon] 2
#24360853 - 05/30/17 05:42 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
What communist country are people starving in?
Qualifiers:
- has to be true communism
- nation has to be safe
- situation is happening currently
I can play this game too.
--------------------
|
Cyrus19
Represents Enlil's Hope
Registered: 02/24/17
Posts: 2,503
|
Re: Why Socialism? [Re: Cinnamon] 2
#24360878 - 05/30/17 06:06 AM (7 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Quote:
demiu5 said:
Quote:
Cinnamon said:
Starvation isn't something that occurs under capitalism.
Where's the starvation?
Find me all the dead American's dying from starvation.
I can find you millions dying from obesity.
I feel like you've convinced yourself America is so awful and capitalism so heartless you're unable to look around and see how good everything is.
Oh cinnamon many people starved to death in the us before the advent of programs designed to prevent that... Do some reading on America before the new deal.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Silversoul
snoopaloop53
Redstorm
Anonymous
Frappy
Ancalagon