Is national socialism an alternative?

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Impenitent
Posts: 4330
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Impenitent »

Arising_uk wrote: Wed Jul 26, 2017 1:57 am
Impenitent wrote: government based on envy...

-Imp
Who Trump's? I agree.
not trump, any "rich" person

he's rich... give me his stuff

I'll vote for you if you steal from him and give me his stuff....

government based on envy

it's beautiful...

-Imp
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Arising_uk »

Sorry Imp but what are you talking about, AUOS's national socialism?
Impenitent
Posts: 4330
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Impenitent »

any government that redistributes wealth

-Imp
artisticsolution
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by artisticsolution »

Impenitent wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:50 am any government that redistributes wealth

-Imp
What the hell are you talking about? The government does redistribute wealth by making minimum wage so low, taxing the majority while giving the rich all the power and perks.

Why should a janitor make 10 an hour and a CEO make Millions/billions? Why the major discrepancy?

Seems to me your fantasy of the poor man stealing the rich man's wealth is ludicrous when the fact is just the opposite.

I remember a time when you could live on minimum wage. Now it is impossible. Why should someone work 40 hrs a week and not make enough to have food, shelter, clothing.

Where is the incentive to work? Might as well just collect unemployment or go to an uninhabited place and live off the fat of the land until government kicks your poor ass out of the land you should have rightful claim to...by just being born a child of this earth.

Winner take all is not only insane it is inhumane.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

The janitor is seen as doin' shit work while the CEO is seen doin' important work.

If this offends you: campaign to elevate the janitor and reduce the CEO in their fellows' eyes.

Just stay the fuck outta my wallet when you do.

National socialism is just communitarianism in a different skirt: a bad idea.
Impenitent
Posts: 4330
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Impenitent »

artisticsolution wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:28 pm
Impenitent wrote: Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:50 am any government that redistributes wealth

-Imp
What the hell are you talking about? The government does redistribute wealth by making minimum wage so low, taxing the majority while giving the rich all the power and perks.

Why should a janitor make 10 an hour and a CEO make Millions/billions? Why the major discrepancy?

Seems to me your fantasy of the poor man stealing the rich man's wealth is ludicrous when the fact is just the opposite.

I remember a time when you could live on minimum wage. Now it is impossible. Why should someone work 40 hrs a week and not make enough to have food, shelter, clothing.

Where is the incentive to work? Might as well just collect unemployment or go to an uninhabited place and live off the fat of the land until government kicks your poor ass out of the land you should have rightful claim to...by just being born a child of this earth.

Winner take all is not only insane it is inhumane.
government based on envy...

he's rich, steal his stuff and give it to everyone - that is so "humane"

-Imp
artisticsolution
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by artisticsolution »

You two are not making sense.

Ask yourself this...

If one person and everything and the other has nothing....

Which one did the stealing?

Common sense boys.... :roll:
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

"If one person (has) everything and the other has nothing...."

"Which one did the stealing?"

I counter with...

Stan works hard, has a home, money in the bank, and some of what he thinks of as the comforts.

Joe does nuthin', lives in the streets, has no cash, and none of what he thinks of as the comforts.

Q: Which one did the stealing?

A: No one. Joe takes care of himself, Stan does not; each is gettin' exactly what he deserves.
artisticsolution
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am

Re:

Post by artisticsolution »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2017 5:11 pm "If one person (has) everything and the other has nothing...."

"Which one did the stealing?"

I counter with...

Stan works hard, has a home, money in the bank, and some of what he thinks of as the comforts.

Joe does nuthin', lives in the streets, has no cash, and none of what he thinks of as the comforts.

Q: Which one did the stealing?

A: No one. Joe takes care of himself, Stan does not; each is gettin' exactly what he deserves.
Stan works a lot harder to make ends meet because of the rich man picking his pockets. Stan pays way more taxes proportionally than the rich man. Stan does not get the equal opportunity in business either...because the rich man sets up the law to favor himself. It's very hard for Stan to open hos own business...because the rich man made sure he couldn't get the licensing, with by making it too expensive or grandfathering the law so to make it nearly impossible.

There need'nt be that many Joe's in this world, on the other hand. If Joe could actually earn enough to live on minimum wage. Again I ask...where is the incentive to work if one can't make a living?

If I had a choice of work and be homeless and hungry...or not work and be homeless and hungry...I'd chose not to work.

There has to be some sort of incentive for one to go to work or one feels hopeless.

But I am wasting me breath. You can't see it because you are too brainwashed by your ideology.

I'm done.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

"I'm done."

Thank god...last thing I want is another ring 'round the rosie with another nimrod.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Walker »

artisticsolution wrote: Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:53 pm You two are not making sense.

Ask yourself this...

If one person and everything and the other has nothing....

Which one did the stealing?

Common sense boys.... :roll:
It makes perfect sense.

One plants in the Spring, tends the plants in the summer, harvests in the autumn and eats during the winter.
Another with twisted logic does not, and then accuses the first of stealing the sunshine and thus the food.

Refuges from hell turn a patch of barren desert into a modern oasis, then other folks try and claim the fruit was stolen from them.

- The earth’s resources, some would say God-given resources, lay fallow due to ineptitude and sloth.
- Some enterprising folks come along and work hard to accept the never-will-be-used gifts of nature (rare metals, oil, etc.), and are accused of stealing the resulting wealth.

- The board game Monopoly is fun because human nature can bargain within the rules.
- One player says to Another, I played the game right and got lucky, in addition to getting an education and being decent to people, which is about all it takes in a free, egalitarin society where achievement and potential are rewarded, no matter the birth. Since I’m winning and you’re just about out of the game, I’ll give you 10 times the worth of that little property for the deed, just because I can and because I want it for my own purposes. - - The choice is yours to do what you have to do, Another.

- It’s like when some crusader makes a weapon out of highlighting a manufacturer’s use of cheap foreign labor.
- The manufacturer goes bankrupt and the cheap foreign labor, the workers, are left with nothing instead of the little bit for which they were happy to trade their life force, for they would rather have the opportunity to make a little bit than have nothing.
- To have nothing is to be enslaved by poverty, and in a Great Society this naturally can cause an impoverished state of mind to fester.
- To have the chance to make a little bit is freedom, as every kid who used to cut lawns or deliver papers used to know before adults took over the duties.

The conclusion is obvious.

The progressive policies of the Great Society have stolen opportunity from today's youth.

The examples are everywhere.

Of course there is more to it, as you once again have the opportunity to constructively contribute, perhaps with examples in the same vein. For instance, sharper class distinctions have evolved within the past half century. Just look at California. Wealth on the coast, struggling inland.

Did Portugal steal all that waterfront property from Spain, or did Spain steal all that inland property from Portugal?
Will the same thing happen in California?
Post Reply