Reagan also signed the Job Training Partnership Act of 1982. Sponsored by a pair of Socialist Senators you might've heard of. Filthy-rich limousine liberals, both of 'em. Edward Moore "Ted" Kennedy. And James Danforth "Trotsky" Quayle III.
As an actual libertarian socialist, I really like how this one pokes fun at all the misuse and abuse of the term "socialist" as a pejorative term against the other side, a mere remnant of McCarthy-era persecution and indoctrination.
Nothing he mentioned is "Socialist". The government doesn't hand any of that out for free, its all paid for both through taxes and through donations, all eminating from a Capitalist society. How fucking stupid are you? Which, not one of you can do without.
@AesopsRetreat So you're saying that directing taxes toward those federal government programs isn't socialist? It ain't conservative! Conservatism doesn't work!
@AesopsRetreat From the dictionary: "The term “socialism” has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammeled workings of the economic market." In other words, socialism is when the government interferes with the free market to provide goods or services to society as a whole as in "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."
@AesopsRetreat It probably made sense to you as you typed, but what did you mean by "Which, not one of you can do without."??? Also, the services are free to the recipients. If you are robbed, the police don't had you a bill for taking a report & investigating the crime. Most roads aren't toll roads. Most libraries don't have lending fees. Free does not mean no money was raised or spent to provide the service.
So, Roy, when are you going to start distributing your CDs to the People, free of charge? "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs", right?...
This dude is a fuck tard.Roads and bridges,etc,are basic needs ..Taking my money and giving it to people who do not work and giving it to non citizens and rich powerfull politicians is socialism and or stealing..
@CrashMarket ahh, an emotional argument! How refreshing. Socialism is a system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. Whatever you do for a living I would bet it's best giving a large portion to others because you sound like a dick.
@AtheistDaddy It makes me a bad person if you do not get what I worked for?,no it does not you hand out taker..Your a gov paid troll or a lazy couch rock waiting for the check in the mail..
@CrashMarket True. I am a Gov. paid troll. True. I am retired from the US Air Force. I have served in two war zones. WTF have you done you mindless corproate puppet. Oh yeah, nothing. Other people will fight for your ability to question government you pussy, no worries.
@AtheistDaddy Damn your taking this argument the wrong way now.My prob with socialism is the constant taking of our freedoms by the gov through all sorts of costly regulations ,taxes to the max that we cannot handle,income ,sales,hidden fees on business that are passed off to the working consumer.We have no finacial freedom any more mainly because of lefty politicians who give by taking and they never spend a dime of their own money while they talk about compassion..
@CrashMarket the dilemma is that yourargument with socialism are based upon missrepresentations of socialism. Socialism is a system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. What you are talking about is corporatism. Left wing politics (giving to the poor) is much more palatable than right wing politics (taking from the poor). Wouldn't you agree?
@AtheistDaddy There is a bit of socialism of capital in most realms of life.The so called giving to the poor by taking from some one else is not palatable or justified.The ones that are taking and giving by force do not invest a dime of their money in anything They just make laws that force us to pay too much of what we have in order for them to get it,they pass out the crumbs to the ones who realy do not deserve it and pocket the cake,and if you do not like it they put a gun in your face.
@CrashMarket We disagree. Taxation is necessary to promote and expand a society. There must be balance, of course. The argument that taxation is theft (force) is moot as that is exactly what government s for, to enforce. The United States has some of the lowest tax rates in the western world. I would argue that spending money to educate, assist with housing and food on lower income people is healthy for them as well as for the rest of the citizenry.
@AtheistDaddy No ,taxation at this level is very high,the US is too high,and too much money is Thrown away in order for the politicans to gain power..If you want to preach it then,so tell me why the politicians never spend any of their own money on it..THEY DO NOT,and they will not.We are just about broke,and your theory of All this taxation is against our freedom and it is keeping us in debt slavery..You must make a big check from your daddy gov to be preacing that BS
@CrashMarket I do receive a check from the government as I am a (retired) disabled veteran. It is not very high and I continue to work, some veterans are not as fortunate as I. I also receive healthcare from the VA, which is paid for though taxes as I was injured dring wartime activities. Seems only right that a contract I signed is upheld by the Government. No?
@AtheistDaddy You wasted your time and my money if you fought for this oppresive US shit government we have now to sit here and tell me that it is just fine for a bunch of rich elites,The Fed Bank along with the IRS senate and US Congress, to have the right to take my money at force..What hell were you fighting for it the USAF,sounds like facism to me..You may as well have been droping bombs on the US dirt..Taxes should only be on a local county level at a very low rate..
@CrashMarket Firstly, 'using force' is what governments do. I'm sure you would support enforcing all manner of law with force. Taxation is law and force is used to 'enforce' it. Secondly, you are using words you don't understand. Like Socialism, you are missrepresenting Facism. I never fought to support a one party state and I support politicians that agree to disagree with the State. Lastly, you and I are parties to a social contract and taxation is our end of this contract.
@AtheistDaddy I understand what I am saying with the words.So your bottom line is that if the gov,which are powerfull people in a powerfull position,say and write laws that take away your freedoms is just fine and the citizens should agree with them ,no matter what...If you belive that ,your a sick one and your in a IRS office or some government complex .Contract,I never singed a contract to pay them or you all sorts of money that is mostly throw away..
@CrashMarket Governments exist. This you will have to come to grips with. The United States, while far from perfect, has several avenues available for striking down laws. Courts, petitions and the vote all come to mind. Contracts don't all have to be signed. When ou eat at a resterauant you have an implied contract before the meal. Hopfully, you don't advocate skipping out on what's owed. Why not move to another country that is libertarian and on the gold standard. Oh, it doesn't exist.
@AtheistDaddy It existed here for a short span but the oppressors messed it up for the average ones like me,plus FDR with the gold confiscation and no gold backing the dollar..Anyway ,we are all done for in one way or another ,our fredom is 75% gone,the dollar is 95% toast ,and a depression is near ,and they would have even been better off if they had not have done it,they did not have to ruin us in order to make themselves more rich and powerfull.Stock up on your needs ,we all should....LATERSZ
@CrashMarket The "short span before the oppressors mess it up" included slavery, indentured servitude, no rights for women, poison dumping and unregulated food manufacturing. If that is utopian it is only for a select few. The dollar did not become a full fiat currency until 1971 under Nixon. The word Freedom that you use is a relative term. I am quite sure that many are more free than they were in the era you describe. The "go back in time" argument makes sense only for wealthy white men.
AtheistDaddy Well it surely is on the road to nowhere now,yes I know but now your crying about how the whites had it better,we all know that,but I am on the basic monetary principles and it is way off from what it should be.Let's do not get all emotional about slavery ,womens rights,ok,we know that and you know what I meant. .You lose an argument and the tears start to roll,"OH MY I feel so guilty ,those old whiteys were so mean".Man that is old news.
@CrashMarket I am pointing out that your monetary principles were complicit and supported the idea of buying and selling people as commodities. I can show several nations that benefit from socialistic principals. How many can you show that are on the Gold Standard or have less regulations in their market? When you say "hey, we used to be great!" you ignore the injustices done to people in the United States. Injustices that took government not market intervention. Facts are facts, sorry.
@AtheistDaddy You just cannot get enoUgh can you,I rattled your nerves a litle too much ..All this intervention with socialism has nearly got us in a depression,and the social countries that seem to be dong well are living off the old money they have unTIL it runs out..I am not ignoring injustices but I cannot get all teary eyed and emotional so as to pay for your anger about what I had nothing to do with back in the slavery period Mr Whine.==OK WHAt NOW ,You want some more of that cheese.
@CrashMarket I am not whining at all. I point out actual existing governments with socialistic principles and all you give me are ad hominem. You can't show this market utopia you aspire to because it doesn't exist. Simple.
@AtheistDaddy .I - DID - NOT SAY -ANYTHNG ABOUT- UTOPIA-.I- AM -STATING- WHAT -SHOULD- BE- OUR -ORIGINAL- -SYSTEM-OF- MONETARY --POLICY--- OK ,what now
@CrashMarket you speak of monetary policy where taxes are only collected at a county level and are very low. We would not have roads between states, we would not have national parks or beaches, we would not have a federal military, we would not have laws upholding the rights of minorities and women, we would not have laws enforcing clean drinking water standards, we would not have GPS and, ironically, we would not have packet switching which is what I am using to tell you all this.
@AtheistDaddy No ,I win because I did not break down in favour of your emotional fake arguments about Social Injustice .."Oh Please I feel so torn up with Guilt that I owe rich office holders half of what I work because it makes every thing fair" ..You are making me very sleepy now with boredom.zzzzzzzzzzzzz
@AtheistDaddy@AtheistDaddy Would you like some cheese with that emotional Whine? How about a kleenex......Wow you pulled the last rabbit out of the hat ..I am through ,so go argue with someone else about how great everything is now with our wealth redistribution system . ..Maybe they will get all teary eyed about slavery,white guys,etc
@AtheistDaddy I live near a major US AFB,I have no problems with them,many of my family members were in the military and soldiers from way back. They fought for the gov that has turned against us now..It all was nearly usless I think seeing what I see now..
Capitalism always wins over Socialism because Capitalism works by force. You can force people to fend for themselves, but you can't force people to cooperate...I HATE that...
Like how he's poking fun at all the people who sling the term around as an epithet without considering all the "Socialist" benefits enjoyed by the very people slinging the accusation
There are many Christians who believe that any deviation from Christianity, or even from their own particular sect, is not just apostasy but equivalent to full-blown Satanism.
In a like manner, some think that anyone who wants any more government action than they do is a goddamn 'Socialist'...and of course are seen as socialists by people to _their_ right.
As in a lot of cases, 'socialist' is better used as an adjective than as a noun. (See: 'élitist','conservative','egalitarian',...)
1989, after 8 yrs of republicans & Reagan 160 billion in taxpayer $ to bail out 2000 failed banks & S&L's by Bush Sr. They didn't call it socialism b/c Texas got half. 2008, after 8 yrs of republican rule under Bush, TARP trillions of taxpayer $ to bail out banks, again. THEN you turn around & call Obama a socialist. THEN you attack his "record" budget & deficit. Iraq & Afghan war funding was all off budget, Off Bush's budget. Guess whose budget it went to b4 taking office?
I'm an actual (European) democratic socialist, and I gotta say...
The US is full of willing corporate bitches, who still are fooled by McCarthy age scaremongering, and as such vote against their own interests, and basically give all their money to the rich, whilst RAGING when someone in actual need gets just enough gov't assistance to SURVIVE.
Nyeah, I am not that crazy about MOST Americans. Although to be honest I blame the poisonous US political culture more then I blame them.
I'd move to a nation with a real S.D. party, but I love my country, want to see it improved, and am still not so turned-off by my fellow-citizens that I think that that's hopeless...I'd love to live in a country far enough to the Left that _I_ could be a cranky old right-winger criticising the Damn Gummint for making people 'soft'....
@TheSkunkCat i am sorry you feel that way about most americans, but i really can't blame you! The problem with the USA is that a good percentage of it's citizens have had their vote/values hijacked- they have allowed their values to be highjacked via 2 very emotional issues here in the states - abortion and gay marriage - and then of course FOX NEWS ORGANIZATIONS keep those issues front and center threw 1/2 truths and full lies- if people would just educate themselves here- and turn off the tv
Respond to this video... just wanted to finish my thought there- the crux of why americans are so stupid and vote republican which are a party that is clearly against anything that would help the regular folks voting for them is that their votes have been hijacked by 2 sympathetic issues - abortion and gay marriage - 2 things that no new president can or will do anything about - people are so uneducated about these two things and allow their whole value system to be sucked away-so sad
@TheSkunkCat Exactly! The Republicans have been very successful at pitting poor and middle class white's against minorities, even though they're in the same boat as the minorities. Many of these right-wingers think Hitler was a socialist because he was in the National Socialist Party. You know, because a fascist can't join a socialist party to fool the general public. Like he was going to create a National Fascist Party, that would've worked well. smh
@kevfal lol not hard to understand that you are american.. socialism and communism is NOT even close to be the same thing. i mean, europes convervative's are for free health care and for free education... things like this has nothing to do with "socialism" or "communism" exept in USA
Republicans/ libertarians take note: 1989, after 8 yrs of republicans & Reagan 160 billion in taxpayer $ to bail out 2000 failed banks & S&L's by Bush Sr. They didn't call it socialism b/c 1/2 of it went to Texas failed S&L's. 2008, after 8 yrs of republican rule under Bush, 12+trillion to bail out banks, again. I know, all Greenspan's fault. He took his orders from that Cheney fella who never gets mentioned in the Tea Party manifesto, Zeitgeist. Even Ron Paul is afraid of him.
What much worse is - Roy tends to tune his strings just to confuse us who, in lack of musical talent but with a definitive knowledge of the vast differences between socialism and other ideologies from living in northeast of Scandinavia, desperately tries to match his capogeography. /
@darris321 There is a wrong way for the government to intervene. I don't know much about the situation with Walmart, but just from what you said about it, I would guess that the government needs to change their actions. But, if left alone, Walmart and other huge chains will eventually wipe out local businesses and the US won't actually produce anything.
I agree with you on the free market bit. We need a mix of it and government intervention.
@Doreauxgard42 I think in a truly free market, a monopoly could not exist, however we are too far past that point. So, anti-trust laws make sense to me. I like the idea of limiting a business from strangling the competition because the competition is the only thing that makes the free market amazing.
I was opposed to minimum wage until I found out that minimum wage has no effect on unemployment (for now obvious to me reasons) I just follow the logic until a study tells me otherwise.
@darris321 The fact that private schools are better, if true (and I don't know), is irrelevant. Those who don't have the money to access it should still have the option to get educational instruction.
@Doreauxgard42 I feel like schooling is an optional institution. Before there was public school the US still managed to have a great deal of educated people. A lot of people self educated. When you put a public system in place it makes a standard of schooling such that if you try to get a job you will be shunned if you haven't met at least the highest of the government public system. If the government didn't provide a free option, private schools would be cheaper.
@danger0usknowledge there's no reason to be a douche here, guy. I'm opposed to government because to me it seems like the most rational position. The fact that you disagree with me doesn't make me stupid and it certainly doesn't, for any reason, warrant your belief that I mispronounce government or that I have a southern accent. On that note, what do you have against southerners? you know the accent doesn't actually cause stupidity. Now, if you would like to actually challenge something, do it.
@Liberty4Ever At this point nobody cares about raising taxes. People are bad that the top 2% pay 11 times less than the bottom. Nobody wants to pay more, but I'm sure that you can agree with these "Socialists" that the average person would have REDUCED taxes if they were equalized throughout the population.
by the way for those of you like Liberty4ever what exactly are "crushing" taxes? How high do they have to be to be "crushing"? And is there as strong an objection to subsidies to business (in the hundreds of billions) as there are for roads, education, food, medicine etc? Or to the huge military spending?
@wotmot223 How high are "crushing" taxes? How about taxes over 50%? Is that big enough government for you? You may scoff because your income taxes are much less than that, but we're taxed EVERYWHERE. Federal excise taxes. Federal usage fees. My state has over 240 taxes it assesses. Local taxes. We pay nested taxes. Every time you buy something, it's taxed at every stage of manufacture. Example: 55% of the cost of a can of soda are taxes. atr dotorg
sigh, yes, I mispelled several words. Congradulations on your highschool experiences liberty4u. It is however a little hard to belive you, the roman empire ended more than 200 years AFTER gladitoral games ended, and more than 300 years after humans being in them ended ( there is your circus, gone). And I do have to laugh at the fact you corrected my spelling, and completly avoided the facts (yes, verifiable facts) brought up in contradiction to your posts. How sad.
You ever notice that most of the people who complain about the Nanny State come from just the kind of rich families that actually hire nannies to raise their children?
Ok, so your opposed to the size of government we have? Military spending, regulation, roads etc? Not sure where you are at. Is the song written about Obama because he is the current president? Would you do the same for someone like GWB, Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon? Do you agree then that both the republicans and democrates are the problem and that we need to take a look at everything the government does, and then come to some kind of useful comproise that makes things better?
I think he's equating bureaucracy and general inefficiency to socialism. At least that's the characterization of a capitalist's view of socialism he's putting forth. The manufacturing of a light bulb is just used for comedic purposes.
One last thing. I become extremly tired of people who speak of "big government" as being evil. Ronald Reagan was a huge big government proponent, He raised taxes, and enlarged the size of (and number or employes in) the federal government. Please at least be honest. Most "anti-big-government" people want it big, but want it to do what THEY like, and not do what they don't. When you start talking about cutting our military spending to only 3 times the next largest budget in the world... (shrug)
@wotmot223 You seem to think I worship Reagan and would be hurt to admit that he increased the size of government. In fact, I'm very critical of Reagan for his part in that. Similarly, you seem to think that I'm a neocon who likes big government as long as it's focused on military spending and war. I'm extremely critical of that as well. Our country was founded with a navy for defense, but NO STANDING ARMY, to prevent imperial aspirations that weaken our national security and impoverish us.
@Liberty4Ever Oh... MY... GOD! you equate bread and circus with socialism? You think Rome was a democracy and that 51% of that society "voted" for bread and cirus. Most people were dirt poor, and the bread and circus was something the elite provided to keep them from rising up. NOBODY "elected" thier senators in rome, and the senate by the time rome fell was a joke. Ceaser ruled. Never mind, and honestly, anyone THIS ignroant isn't worth having a conversation with.
@wotmot223 Male citizens DID vote in Roman elections. Yes, the senate was "a joke", corrupt and self serving, just like in the US. The Roman Republic degenerated into a democracy (aka "mob rule") with people voting for free stuff from the government and the size of government swelled as the taxes crushed any who would produce... and the exact same thing is happening now in the US. We're living in the time that future history books will refer to as the Fall of the American Empire.
@Liberty4Ever So the Roman Republic ended because of democracy and people wanting "free stuff". I always thought the Republic ended because of the rivalries between members of the Roman aristocracy which all to often degenerated into civil war, and it was the desire to avoid this upheaval which led the Senate and people of Rome to hand more and more powers to Octavian. But apparently I was wrong and it was all the fault of the greedy plebs.
@Caracalla23 The Roman Empire ended for the same reason that ALL empires end. Big government is malignant. This parasite always grows so large that it kills the host. The symptoms are foreign militaristic adventurism, debasement of the currency, corruption, and social welfare. Generally speaking, in the US, the Democrats and Republicans engage in lip service opposition to the military and welfare spending respectively, both parties cause corruption, and both ignore the currency crisis.
@Liberty4Ever oh.... good... god. All nations end, regardless of the final cause. While I agree that our nation is in fact spending to much on social programs, and on subsidising big government, and the military... however working together for the good of all (you know, like in the constitution where it refers to the providing for the general welfare of the nation (no, not the preamble, look in article one). Ok, you hate the constiution of the US, hate the government... we get it.
@wotmot223 Stop putting words in my mouth... again. I'm a big fan of our Constitution. Unfortunately, it's not perfect. It was obviously designed to bind the federal government to 18 enumerated powers, but it briefly mentions "general welfare", and big government socialists use those two vague words as the pretense for all manner of big government, while ignoring the entire rest of our very specific Constitution in the process.
@Liberty4Ever Two things. Quick history lesson first. Not all men voted in the Roman empire (freedmen were not allowed to vote, nor obviously slaves). Secondly your talking about the FALL of the roman empire, by that time the poor could only vote for tribunes (who could only veto) and the empire was rulled by a dictator. It wasn't "socialist" economicly, nor a democracy politicaly. Lastly the phrase "for the general welfare" in article 1 section 8 is hardly unimportant.
@wotmot223 For you and your ilk, "for the general welfare" is a very big deal. Those four words in our Constitution form a vague intent that is taken out of context and used to refute the entire rest of our Constitution and its specific prohibitions that would prevent the federal government from doing 90% or more of the things they do. Our Constitution lists 18 enumerated powers, and any that aren't specifically named are not the proper role of the federal government. Example: Obamacare
@wotmot223 PS - Funny that you misspelled "ignorant". :-)
You also misspelled "circus", "their", "Rome", and "Caesar"... and you ended your final sentence with a preposition.
Oh yeah... As a high school senior, I won first place in the 1978 Junior Classical League state competition for Roman Culture and Civilization. Really. I did! Four years of high school Latin, and over three decades later I use that knowledge to argue with internet trolls! :-)
are you kidding me? The nazi party was less socialist than most current european nations, and less socialist than the US was at the same time. I will look for the book you recomended but if it speaks of the nazi's as being an ill example of socialism than you might want to reconsider the value of the book. The nazi's were evil because they killed people, not because the had socialist programs (and they were a facist dictatorship, not a socialist nation for goodness sakes)
It's an oddity of human history that societies coalesce around free market capitalism and they thrive, but inevitably become increasingly socialist as there is so much to share and nobody seems to mind when socialists first suggest that we spread the wealth, but invariably, the more the wealth is spread, the less incentive there is to create the wealth and it all crumbles. That point, in the US, is labeled YOU ARE HERE.
Socialism killed the Roman empire and the USSR, and many more in between.
@Liberty4Ever yup, except for the part where there were 10s of thousands of years of people before capitalism. I'm guessing by your logic they didn't actually exist.
@hornylink Barter and trade are as old as recorded history. It's the basis of free market capitalism. So I don't have a clue what you're talking about. As for the advantages of socialism... almost all of that stuff is better done person to person. Put government in the middle, and 50% or more is wasted in bureaucratic overhead, and a lot of the rest goes to the wrong place... AND the money that people would use to help others charitably was wasted on big government.
@Liberty4Ever lol, unless your poor, or starving, or dying from lack of medicine. Gods man, honestly could you spend maybe ten hours studying the history of the US? The US has had "socialist" programs since 1792. As for charity making up the difference, go tell it to the irish from the great famine. Get informed, less embarassing to you
@wotmot223 I've studied the long history of socialism in the US. It has been an irregularly recurring problem throughout US history. For a quick read, I recommend "Not Yours To Give" by Davey Crockett. It's online.
The height of US interest in socialism peaked in the 1930s, but one look at Germany's National SOCIALIST Party (the Nazis) caused the US to detour from the socialist path to tyranny, financial ruin, and wide scale human suffering. 65 years later, we're forgetting that lesson.
@Liberty4Ever The German NATIONAL Socialist party first and foremost were not socialists. They multiple times considered removing Socialist from the name. Socialist stayed in the name for the simple sake that they wished to take the wealth from the Jews and give it to the Aryans. The Nazi party originates from the right wing militant Fatherland party. Which came from the German right wing conservative movement that existed since 1803. The Socialists were the first Hitler had killed for a logical
@Liberty4Ever Socialists wish class warfare and unity among humans, which is in contrast with what the Nazi's wished. The Nazi's wished for a classed society with a high, middle and lower class. They also wished for a society that was highly nationalistic. Socialism is not fascism. They are opposites in theory and they are opposites in history. Need further prove remember 1936. The fascists and right wingers did not wish the socialists, communists and anarchists who had won the election to
@Liberty4Ever rule the country. Thus they began a war during which Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy funded the right wingers to continue their endeavor to control the country. During this war capitalist Americans also funded the right wing nationalists to overthrow the government. Socialism was a disease to them that needed stopped. Fascism offered a position of unprecedented wealth for them due its classed society and nationalism allowing them to not fear unions or socialists.
@Liberty4Ever The Right Wing may try its best to focus on the fact one of the many fascist parties had the word socialist in its name. The Spanish Republicans were socialists. Therefore all Republicans must be socialists regardless of their actual policies. The right shall never white wash history despite their best endeavors. I recommend reading a real book instead of right wing rhetoric which is lies used to justify their position.
@Liberty4Ever The USSR, yes, roman empire, try millitaristic. Yes, socialism doesn't work I agree, but america is not there. There is nothing wrong with making sure growth lifts the poor out of poverty, having a safety net to make sure you don't have to work 70 hours a week to make ends meet, and giving everyong the tools to succeed in a capitalist system. It's called socail capitalism, and it works.
@Liberty4Ever oh....my.... GOD! Anyone, and I mean ANYONE who thinks that the roman empire was "socialist" in any sense of the word is almost certainly barfing up either Glen Beck or the (insanse) version of "history" taught by the john birtch society! The USSR one can I think claim to be socialist, and yes, pure socialism is a problem, I don't advocate for it. But social programs do more for this nation, than harm to it.
@wotmot223 If you don't think socialism significantly contributed to the fall of the Roman empire, do an online search for "bread and circuses" and read the Wikipedia article. Once ANY society learns that 51% of the people can vote to steal from the other 49% via the force of government (aka "redistribute the wealth"), it's all over. We're living in the time that future history books will refer to as The Fall of the American Empire.
I can tell few of you read any classic text on socialist and known that socialist is supose to get rid of classes money and capital intell the state witheraway no take over propeity and capital
@DrUmSensitive We're just by nature quieter than the loud-mouthed idiots. We often follow the old adage "it's better to be thought a quiet fool than to open your mouth and prove it", so often times the more intelligent in a group are quietly thinking while everyone around them is screaming until the very end and then solve everything in a sentence or two (think a population of Jays and Silent Bobs; that's America).
sarcasm is overly use or over simplified. because this just seems stupid to me. basically we are a socialist if we use any public facilities or government run thing. just because i believe the road im driving on should not have been made by the government. doesn't mean i am going to drive off road through the woods to get where i need to get.
@gibblets17 This isn't sarcasm its satire. I've argued with some of your fellow Americans who have posted on this vid and said the only "service" the government should offer is protection (police and military) this is a satirical critique of that arguement.
@trevorzlee Of course it won't happen, cause different nations have different elements of different ideologies, no country is only one colour, all the nations are rainbow-ish.
For example, People's Republic of China is a Communistic nation, but it has aspects which are capitalistic.
@trevorzlee Having things such as public roads, schools, parks or public healthcare may not make that nation a socialistic nation, but they are things nonetheless that one could describe to be of 'socialist' nature.
@Caracalla23 The things you listed are definitely socialist ideas. Socialism is demonized in America still; lingering propaganda from the Cold War against our Communist/Socialist enemies, I guess. Fact is, the socialism Marx wrote about is a fantastic idea-- Marx would roll in his grave if he could see how horrendously Lenin (et al.) actually implemented it.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with our tax dollars being used to benefit the community at large.
@LockeXIII The reason socialism is demonized in America is because of people like you who lump socialism and communism together. Socialism and communism are two separate forms of government. In socialism, while having big government take care of their people, there is still a free market that includes competition. In a socialist market any one person can decide to open a business of their choice. In communism everyone works for the government, with no competition.
@thatissomeBS Again, I'm referring to the Communism and Socialism Marx wrote about in the Communist Manifesto. TRUE Communism is a completely stateless society, utilizing a direct democracy in which the people themselves vote on issues, without the need for representatives.
Also, Socialism is not system of governance. It's a system of economics.
Yes, and socialism is the civil way of going about things. In the current system people get massive amounts of money by making other people lose massive amounts of money, and having money gives one the means to siphon more money from people, usually in a malicious yet legal fashion. In essence, unregulated finance and currency give people the means, motive, and opportunity to exploit others. How is that civil?
I'm a Tea Partying, Republican voting, free-market loving, capitalist. I hate Teddy Roosevelt, Nixon, and some of Eisenhower's actions. Thanks for dispelling that myth.
I'm liberal, and I'm all for capitalism and free markets. However, to some how think companies and markets are going to regulate themselves is naive. I've heard some like Rand Paul say the government didn't have a right to tell private businesses that they had to serve black people as well as white. He claimed that the free market would of taken care of it because people who didn't approve wouldn't dine in those restaurants....yeah, ok....
Socialism can coexist with capitalism. Many criticisms of capitalism from socialists have to do with American capitalism and its consumer culture and lack of basic social programmes such as universal healthcare. Once again, these concepts, while being socialist, can exist in a capitalist nation.
The degree is the important factor. Public libraries are examples of socialist principles employed by a state.
History generally does not support this. Most successful markets survive because of direct government intervention. Indeed, this may be the pragmatic reality for large states.
Unless you mean a severely controlled and restrictive market like... North Korea. Then I agree.
@darkblood626 True, but it wasn't the socialism that caused the nazis to do what they did, it was the nationalism. Having a nationalist romantic fantasy of power and prosperity only leads to destruction. There are many examples of this - Roman empire, Nazi-Germany, Stalin's Russia, North Korea, Neo-conservative America etc...
@paulaegraham Something called Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Well, either that or he was a psychopath. The difference in behaviour isn't too great.
I'm a socialist and proud of it. Awesome song.
shreddakj 2 weeks ago 5
Reagan also signed the Job Training Partnership Act of 1982. Sponsored by a pair of Socialist Senators you might've heard of. Filthy-rich limousine liberals, both of 'em. Edward Moore "Ted" Kennedy. And James Danforth "Trotsky" Quayle III.
UncleMikeNJ 1 month ago
As an actual libertarian socialist, I really like how this one pokes fun at all the misuse and abuse of the term "socialist" as a pejorative term against the other side, a mere remnant of McCarthy-era persecution and indoctrination.
ianmathwiz7 1 month ago
Skunkcat couldn't have said it any better.
Thank you,
An American Democratic Socialist
78kunoichi 2 months ago
this is silly..... oh... I see.... ok
RLRhodesTunes1 2 months ago
I love this song...
slappymacfrodaddy 3 months ago
goodreads(dot)com/quotes/show/132893
frederic bastiat.
just because we oppose to the state doing it does not mean that we oppose it being done.
darris321 4 months ago
Nothing he mentioned is "Socialist". The government doesn't hand any of that out for free, its all paid for both through taxes and through donations, all eminating from a Capitalist society. How fucking stupid are you? Which, not one of you can do without.
AesopsRetreat 4 months ago
@AesopsRetreat So you're saying that directing taxes toward those federal government programs isn't socialist? It ain't conservative! Conservatism doesn't work!
UncleMikeNJ 4 months ago
@AesopsRetreat From the dictionary: "The term “socialism” has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammeled workings of the economic market." In other words, socialism is when the government interferes with the free market to provide goods or services to society as a whole as in "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."
hedo275 2 months ago
@AesopsRetreat It probably made sense to you as you typed, but what did you mean by "Which, not one of you can do without."??? Also, the services are free to the recipients. If you are robbed, the police don't had you a bill for taking a report & investigating the crime. Most roads aren't toll roads. Most libraries don't have lending fees. Free does not mean no money was raised or spent to provide the service.
hedo275 2 months ago
I actually am an American Democratic-Socialist but this one always makes me laugh. How the word has been abused over the last ten years.
Thanks for the laugh Mr. Z
MrCopperhead1861 4 months ago 4
It's odd how many right-wing Americans use "socialism" as an insult when it's working fairly well for us up here in the Nordic countries/Scandinavia.
Kazumaster 4 months ago 7
socialism is working together.
1+1 does not equal 2!
MrWaddefak 4 months ago
21 people don't accept the fact that they're socialists!
UncleMikeNJ 4 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do I count 46, not 47?
ianmathwiz7 5 months ago
Why do I count 46, not 47?
ianmathwiz7 5 months ago
@ianmathwiz7 , Because you're a socialist!
guitarslim56 5 months ago
American "socialists" aren't socialist enough for me.
no2religions 6 months ago 11
So, Roy, when are you going to start distributing your CDs to the People, free of charge? "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs", right?...
stereodreamer23 7 months ago
This dude is a fuck tard.Roads and bridges,etc,are basic needs ..Taking my money and giving it to people who do not work and giving it to non citizens and rich powerfull politicians is socialism and or stealing..
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket ahh, an emotional argument! How refreshing. Socialism is a system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. Whatever you do for a living I would bet it's best giving a large portion to others because you sound like a dick.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy It makes me a bad person if you do not get what I worked for?,no it does not you hand out taker..Your a gov paid troll or a lazy couch rock waiting for the check in the mail..
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket True. I am a Gov. paid troll. True. I am retired from the US Air Force. I have served in two war zones. WTF have you done you mindless corproate puppet. Oh yeah, nothing. Other people will fight for your ability to question government you pussy, no worries.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy Damn your taking this argument the wrong way now.My prob with socialism is the constant taking of our freedoms by the gov through all sorts of costly regulations ,taxes to the max that we cannot handle,income ,sales,hidden fees on business that are passed off to the working consumer.We have no finacial freedom any more mainly because of lefty politicians who give by taking and they never spend a dime of their own money while they talk about compassion..
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket the dilemma is that yourargument with socialism are based upon missrepresentations of socialism. Socialism is a system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. What you are talking about is corporatism. Left wing politics (giving to the poor) is much more palatable than right wing politics (taking from the poor). Wouldn't you agree?
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy There is a bit of socialism of capital in most realms of life.The so called giving to the poor by taking from some one else is not palatable or justified.The ones that are taking and giving by force do not invest a dime of their money in anything They just make laws that force us to pay too much of what we have in order for them to get it,they pass out the crumbs to the ones who realy do not deserve it and pocket the cake,and if you do not like it they put a gun in your face.
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket We disagree. Taxation is necessary to promote and expand a society. There must be balance, of course. The argument that taxation is theft (force) is moot as that is exactly what government s for, to enforce. The United States has some of the lowest tax rates in the western world. I would argue that spending money to educate, assist with housing and food on lower income people is healthy for them as well as for the rest of the citizenry.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy No ,taxation at this level is very high,the US is too high,and too much money is Thrown away in order for the politicans to gain power..If you want to preach it then,so tell me why the politicians never spend any of their own money on it..THEY DO NOT,and they will not.We are just about broke,and your theory of All this taxation is against our freedom and it is keeping us in debt slavery..You must make a big check from your daddy gov to be preacing that BS
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket I do receive a check from the government as I am a (retired) disabled veteran. It is not very high and I continue to work, some veterans are not as fortunate as I. I also receive healthcare from the VA, which is paid for though taxes as I was injured dring wartime activities. Seems only right that a contract I signed is upheld by the Government. No?
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy You wasted your time and my money if you fought for this oppresive US shit government we have now to sit here and tell me that it is just fine for a bunch of rich elites,The Fed Bank along with the IRS senate and US Congress, to have the right to take my money at force..What hell were you fighting for it the USAF,sounds like facism to me..You may as well have been droping bombs on the US dirt..Taxes should only be on a local county level at a very low rate..
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket Firstly, 'using force' is what governments do. I'm sure you would support enforcing all manner of law with force. Taxation is law and force is used to 'enforce' it. Secondly, you are using words you don't understand. Like Socialism, you are missrepresenting Facism. I never fought to support a one party state and I support politicians that agree to disagree with the State. Lastly, you and I are parties to a social contract and taxation is our end of this contract.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy I understand what I am saying with the words.So your bottom line is that if the gov,which are powerfull people in a powerfull position,say and write laws that take away your freedoms is just fine and the citizens should agree with them ,no matter what...If you belive that ,your a sick one and your in a IRS office or some government complex .Contract,I never singed a contract to pay them or you all sorts of money that is mostly throw away..
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket Governments exist. This you will have to come to grips with. The United States, while far from perfect, has several avenues available for striking down laws. Courts, petitions and the vote all come to mind. Contracts don't all have to be signed. When ou eat at a resterauant you have an implied contract before the meal. Hopfully, you don't advocate skipping out on what's owed. Why not move to another country that is libertarian and on the gold standard. Oh, it doesn't exist.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy It existed here for a short span but the oppressors messed it up for the average ones like me,plus FDR with the gold confiscation and no gold backing the dollar..Anyway ,we are all done for in one way or another ,our fredom is 75% gone,the dollar is 95% toast ,and a depression is near ,and they would have even been better off if they had not have done it,they did not have to ruin us in order to make themselves more rich and powerfull.Stock up on your needs ,we all should....LATERSZ
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket The "short span before the oppressors mess it up" included slavery, indentured servitude, no rights for women, poison dumping and unregulated food manufacturing. If that is utopian it is only for a select few. The dollar did not become a full fiat currency until 1971 under Nixon. The word Freedom that you use is a relative term. I am quite sure that many are more free than they were in the era you describe. The "go back in time" argument makes sense only for wealthy white men.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
Comment removed
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy
AtheistDaddy Well it surely is on the road to nowhere now,yes I know but now your crying about how the whites had it better,we all know that,but I am on the basic monetary principles and it is way off from what it should be.Let's do not get all emotional about slavery ,womens rights,ok,we know that and you know what I meant. .You lose an argument and the tears start to roll,"OH MY I feel so guilty ,those old whiteys were so mean".Man that is old news.
CrashMarket 1 second ago
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket I am pointing out that your monetary principles were complicit and supported the idea of buying and selling people as commodities. I can show several nations that benefit from socialistic principals. How many can you show that are on the Gold Standard or have less regulations in their market? When you say "hey, we used to be great!" you ignore the injustices done to people in the United States. Injustices that took government not market intervention. Facts are facts, sorry.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago 2
@AtheistDaddy You just cannot get enoUgh can you,I rattled your nerves a litle too much ..All this intervention with socialism has nearly got us in a depression,and the social countries that seem to be dong well are living off the old money they have unTIL it runs out..I am not ignoring injustices but I cannot get all teary eyed and emotional so as to pay for your anger about what I had nothing to do with back in the slavery period Mr Whine.==OK WHAt NOW ,You want some more of that cheese.
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket I am not whining at all. I point out actual existing governments with socialistic principles and all you give me are ad hominem. You can't show this market utopia you aspire to because it doesn't exist. Simple.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy .I - DID - NOT SAY -ANYTHNG ABOUT- UTOPIA-.I- AM -STATING- WHAT -SHOULD- BE- OUR -ORIGINAL- -SYSTEM-OF- MONETARY --POLICY--- OK ,what now
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket you speak of monetary policy where taxes are only collected at a county level and are very low. We would not have roads between states, we would not have national parks or beaches, we would not have a federal military, we would not have laws upholding the rights of minorities and women, we would not have laws enforcing clean drinking water standards, we would not have GPS and, ironically, we would not have packet switching which is what I am using to tell you all this.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy Your making me laugh realy hard now,so WTPHUCK,,,,,,If a Frog had wings he wouldn;t bump his ass everytime he landed after a jump
CrashMarket 7 months ago
@CrashMarket I see you have no further arguments to support your outrageous desires. Epic fail. Thanks for playing, though.
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy No ,I win because I did not break down in favour of your emotional fake arguments about Social Injustice .."Oh Please I feel so torn up with Guilt that I owe rich office holders half of what I work because it makes every thing fair" ..You are making me very sleepy now with boredom.zzzzzzzzzzzzz
CrashMarket 7 months ago
Comment removed
CrashMarket 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AtheistDaddy @AtheistDaddy Would you like some cheese with that emotional Whine? How about a kleenex......Wow you pulled the last rabbit out of the hat ..I am through ,so go argue with someone else about how great everything is now with our wealth redistribution system . ..Maybe they will get all teary eyed about slavery,white guys,etc
CrashMarket 7 months ago
Comment removed
AtheistDaddy 7 months ago
@AtheistDaddy I live near a major US AFB,I have no problems with them,many of my family members were in the military and soldiers from way back. They fought for the gov that has turned against us now..It all was nearly usless I think seeing what I see now..
CrashMarket 7 months ago
Capitalism always wins over Socialism because Capitalism works by force. You can force people to fend for themselves, but you can't force people to cooperate...I HATE that...
johnarrhea 9 months ago 4
@johnarrhea Actually Socialism and Communism are a result of Capitalism. There is no winner, only progression.
USAFFountain 8 months ago
In this era of overexposure of tea-psychos and idiots like Palin, this is especially funny.
revbookburn 9 months ago 2
heard "one malnourished population raising its standard of living by using its abundant resources for capitalism" lol
darris321 9 months ago
@darris321 Youtube, Noam Chomsky on Capitalism's rising standard of living.
Mestilf22 7 months ago
Like how he's poking fun at all the people who sling the term around as an epithet without considering all the "Socialist" benefits enjoyed by the very people slinging the accusation
Halloween111 9 months ago 68
There are many Christians who believe that any deviation from Christianity, or even from their own particular sect, is not just apostasy but equivalent to full-blown Satanism.
In a like manner, some think that anyone who wants any more government action than they do is a goddamn 'Socialist'...and of course are seen as socialists by people to _their_ right.
As in a lot of cases, 'socialist' is better used as an adjective than as a noun. (See: 'élitist','conservative','egalitarian',...)
ObviousSockPuppet231 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
danger0usknowledge 10 months ago
I'm an actual (European) democratic socialist, and I gotta say...
The US is full of willing corporate bitches, who still are fooled by McCarthy age scaremongering, and as such vote against their own interests, and basically give all their money to the rich, whilst RAGING when someone in actual need gets just enough gov't assistance to SURVIVE.
Nyeah, I am not that crazy about MOST Americans. Although to be honest I blame the poisonous US political culture more then I blame them.
TheSkunkCat 10 months ago 107
@TheSkunkCat
@TheSkunkCat
I'd move to a nation with a real S.D. party, but I love my country, want to see it improved, and am still not so turned-off by my fellow-citizens that I think that that's hopeless...I'd love to live in a country far enough to the Left that _I_ could be a cranky old right-winger criticising the Damn Gummint for making people 'soft'....
ObviousSockPuppet231 9 months ago
@ObviousSockPuppet231 Same here. I am stuck with two options...
Move to another country that is better, or stay and fix this one... I think ill stay and fix, haha. But ohh, Check this out, a great Party ^_^
socialistparty-usa. org/
wensel911 9 months ago 2
@TheSkunkCat i am sorry you feel that way about most americans, but i really can't blame you! The problem with the USA is that a good percentage of it's citizens have had their vote/values hijacked- they have allowed their values to be highjacked via 2 very emotional issues here in the states - abortion and gay marriage - and then of course FOX NEWS ORGANIZATIONS keep those issues front and center threw 1/2 truths and full lies- if people would just educate themselves here- and turn off the tv
freedom1234573 4 months ago
Respond to this video... just wanted to finish my thought there- the crux of why americans are so stupid and vote republican which are a party that is clearly against anything that would help the regular folks voting for them is that their votes have been hijacked by 2 sympathetic issues - abortion and gay marriage - 2 things that no new president can or will do anything about - people are so uneducated about these two things and allow their whole value system to be sucked away-so sad
freedom1234573 4 months ago
@TheSkunkCat Exactly! The Republicans have been very successful at pitting poor and middle class white's against minorities, even though they're in the same boat as the minorities. Many of these right-wingers think Hitler was a socialist because he was in the National Socialist Party. You know, because a fascist can't join a socialist party to fool the general public. Like he was going to create a National Fascist Party, that would've worked well. smh
neoviking69 1 month ago
@TheSkunkCat Thumbs up from an American democratic socialist.
KCKatheist 1 month ago 3
@TheSkunkCat LOL Europe is going down the fucking drain LOLOL!!! YOU FUCKING LOSE
itachi705 2 weeks ago
@itachi705 They're going down the drain mostly because of the US's economic blunderings you ignorant fuck...
PalulukanMakto 1 week ago
You are FABULOUSE!!! ♥ im automatically a fan now
lockitkitten 10 months ago
Shut up, you are all idiots.
nerdude1010 10 months ago
@kevfal Being an atheist means that if there is a god then that god has >FAILED< to convince you and CANNOT then be all powerfull and all knowing.
We are NOT the decendants of apes, WE ARE APES, we are the definition of what an ape is.
Yahweigh 10 months ago
@kevfal capitalism does the same thing but is just unnoticed.
Yahweigh 10 months ago
@kevfal lol not hard to understand that you are american.. socialism and communism is NOT even close to be the same thing. i mean, europes convervative's are for free health care and for free education... things like this has nothing to do with "socialism" or "communism" exept in USA
knezoskin 11 months ago
@knezoskin im not american
Yahweigh 10 months ago
is 46 socialists too many?
Mattysmyth0593 11 months ago
danger0usknowledge 11 months ago
Caught him live...best & funniest ah ever saw.
It helps if ya gets the jokes which most of you
will not. He's good even if you just sit and stare
and make ugly faces every time he says the
bad "S" word which is Teddy S Truman's
muddle name.-)
danger0usknowledge 11 months ago
@kevfal
What much worse is - Roy tends to tune his strings just to confuse us who, in lack of musical talent but with a definitive knowledge of the vast differences between socialism and other ideologies from living in northeast of Scandinavia, desperately tries to match his capogeography. /
WargWilliam 11 months ago
Love the guy...butter is that a laugh track or live?
Roy, are you now or have you ever used a laugh
track for you is videos, huh, secret Muslim socialist
laugh tracking commie? No? I didn't think so.
danger0usknowledge 11 months ago
capitalism isn't corporatism. The fact that walmart is able to exploit poor nations is because of the government buddy-buddiness.
the free market has made some roads. they are always faster than the government roads. that doesn't mean we shouldn't have government roads.
private schools do better than public schools too.
I realize this is a joke, but since you're all socialists you might provide an actual argument against me instead of people who just disagree.
darris321 11 months ago
@darris321 There is a wrong way for the government to intervene. I don't know much about the situation with Walmart, but just from what you said about it, I would guess that the government needs to change their actions. But, if left alone, Walmart and other huge chains will eventually wipe out local businesses and the US won't actually produce anything.
I agree with you on the free market bit. We need a mix of it and government intervention.
Doreauxgard42 11 months ago
@Doreauxgard42 I think in a truly free market, a monopoly could not exist, however we are too far past that point. So, anti-trust laws make sense to me. I like the idea of limiting a business from strangling the competition because the competition is the only thing that makes the free market amazing.
I was opposed to minimum wage until I found out that minimum wage has no effect on unemployment (for now obvious to me reasons) I just follow the logic until a study tells me otherwise.
darris321 11 months ago
@darris321 The fact that private schools are better, if true (and I don't know), is irrelevant. Those who don't have the money to access it should still have the option to get educational instruction.
Doreauxgard42 11 months ago
@Doreauxgard42 I feel like schooling is an optional institution. Before there was public school the US still managed to have a great deal of educated people. A lot of people self educated. When you put a public system in place it makes a standard of schooling such that if you try to get a job you will be shunned if you haven't met at least the highest of the government public system. If the government didn't provide a free option, private schools would be cheaper.
darris321 11 months ago
@darris321 "the fact that walmart is able to exploit poor
nations is because of the government buddy-buddiness."
*You are indeed a deep thinker*
Free Mkt roads are always faster than *Gumberment* roads?
You should put that philosophy to song. No wonder no one
wants to argue against a giant philosopher like yourself.
R U being unintentionally funny? Yes, I think U R.
danger0usknowledge 11 months ago
@danger0usknowledge there's no reason to be a douche here, guy. I'm opposed to government because to me it seems like the most rational position. The fact that you disagree with me doesn't make me stupid and it certainly doesn't, for any reason, warrant your belief that I mispronounce government or that I have a southern accent. On that note, what do you have against southerners? you know the accent doesn't actually cause stupidity. Now, if you would like to actually challenge something, do it.
darris321 11 months ago
@Liberty4Ever At this point nobody cares about raising taxes. People are bad that the top 2% pay 11 times less than the bottom. Nobody wants to pay more, but I'm sure that you can agree with these "Socialists" that the average person would have REDUCED taxes if they were equalized throughout the population.
darkalleyheroes 11 months ago
by the way for those of you like Liberty4ever what exactly are "crushing" taxes? How high do they have to be to be "crushing"? And is there as strong an objection to subsidies to business (in the hundreds of billions) as there are for roads, education, food, medicine etc? Or to the huge military spending?
wotmot223 11 months ago
@wotmot223 How high are "crushing" taxes? How about taxes over 50%? Is that big enough government for you? You may scoff because your income taxes are much less than that, but we're taxed EVERYWHERE. Federal excise taxes. Federal usage fees. My state has over 240 taxes it assesses. Local taxes. We pay nested taxes. Every time you buy something, it's taxed at every stage of manufacture. Example: 55% of the cost of a can of soda are taxes. atr dotorg
Liberty4Ever 11 months ago
Roy Zimmerman Nails it, subsidizes it, pro-cures it, BBQ's it,
Michael Moore's it, deregulates it, lobby's for it...
causin we all be is *sochallists* in a limited
zeitgeist kind of Tea Bircher sort of way of course.
danger0usknowledge 11 months ago
sigh, yes, I mispelled several words. Congradulations on your highschool experiences liberty4u. It is however a little hard to belive you, the roman empire ended more than 200 years AFTER gladitoral games ended, and more than 300 years after humans being in them ended ( there is your circus, gone). And I do have to laugh at the fact you corrected my spelling, and completly avoided the facts (yes, verifiable facts) brought up in contradiction to your posts. How sad.
wotmot223 1 year ago
If you do not understand by now that it is far better to be a socialist than a fascist, a republican, anytime, absolutely anytime,
ThePythoncharly 1 year ago
You ever notice that most of the people who complain about the Nanny State come from just the kind of rich families that actually hire nannies to raise their children?
COLDB33R 1 year ago
Brilliant!
lennhart 1 year ago
sorry, the critic about socialist, not the song about obama, my error.
wotmot223 1 year ago
Ok, so your opposed to the size of government we have? Military spending, regulation, roads etc? Not sure where you are at. Is the song written about Obama because he is the current president? Would you do the same for someone like GWB, Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon? Do you agree then that both the republicans and democrates are the problem and that we need to take a look at everything the government does, and then come to some kind of useful comproise that makes things better?
wotmot223 1 year ago
I think he's equating bureaucracy and general inefficiency to socialism. At least that's the characterization of a capitalist's view of socialism he's putting forth. The manufacturing of a light bulb is just used for comedic purposes.
suniseclipsed 1 year ago
How is the manufacturing/delivering of a light bulb socialism?
fokkhead 1 year ago
One last thing. I become extremly tired of people who speak of "big government" as being evil. Ronald Reagan was a huge big government proponent, He raised taxes, and enlarged the size of (and number or employes in) the federal government. Please at least be honest. Most "anti-big-government" people want it big, but want it to do what THEY like, and not do what they don't. When you start talking about cutting our military spending to only 3 times the next largest budget in the world... (shrug)
wotmot223 1 year ago
@wotmot223 You seem to think I worship Reagan and would be hurt to admit that he increased the size of government. In fact, I'm very critical of Reagan for his part in that. Similarly, you seem to think that I'm a neocon who likes big government as long as it's focused on military spending and war. I'm extremely critical of that as well. Our country was founded with a navy for defense, but NO STANDING ARMY, to prevent imperial aspirations that weaken our national security and impoverish us.
Liberty4Ever 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever Oh... MY... GOD! you equate bread and circus with socialism? You think Rome was a democracy and that 51% of that society "voted" for bread and cirus. Most people were dirt poor, and the bread and circus was something the elite provided to keep them from rising up. NOBODY "elected" thier senators in rome, and the senate by the time rome fell was a joke. Ceaser ruled. Never mind, and honestly, anyone THIS ignroant isn't worth having a conversation with.
wotmot223 1 year ago
@wotmot223 Male citizens DID vote in Roman elections. Yes, the senate was "a joke", corrupt and self serving, just like in the US. The Roman Republic degenerated into a democracy (aka "mob rule") with people voting for free stuff from the government and the size of government swelled as the taxes crushed any who would produce... and the exact same thing is happening now in the US. We're living in the time that future history books will refer to as the Fall of the American Empire.
Liberty4Ever 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever So the Roman Republic ended because of democracy and people wanting "free stuff". I always thought the Republic ended because of the rivalries between members of the Roman aristocracy which all to often degenerated into civil war, and it was the desire to avoid this upheaval which led the Senate and people of Rome to hand more and more powers to Octavian. But apparently I was wrong and it was all the fault of the greedy plebs.
Caracalla23 11 months ago
@Caracalla23 The Roman Empire ended for the same reason that ALL empires end. Big government is malignant. This parasite always grows so large that it kills the host. The symptoms are foreign militaristic adventurism, debasement of the currency, corruption, and social welfare. Generally speaking, in the US, the Democrats and Republicans engage in lip service opposition to the military and welfare spending respectively, both parties cause corruption, and both ignore the currency crisis.
Liberty4Ever 11 months ago
@Liberty4Ever oh.... good... god. All nations end, regardless of the final cause. While I agree that our nation is in fact spending to much on social programs, and on subsidising big government, and the military... however working together for the good of all (you know, like in the constitution where it refers to the providing for the general welfare of the nation (no, not the preamble, look in article one). Ok, you hate the constiution of the US, hate the government... we get it.
wotmot223 11 months ago
@wotmot223 Stop putting words in my mouth... again. I'm a big fan of our Constitution. Unfortunately, it's not perfect. It was obviously designed to bind the federal government to 18 enumerated powers, but it briefly mentions "general welfare", and big government socialists use those two vague words as the pretense for all manner of big government, while ignoring the entire rest of our very specific Constitution in the process.
Liberty4Ever 11 months ago
@Liberty4Ever Two things. Quick history lesson first. Not all men voted in the Roman empire (freedmen were not allowed to vote, nor obviously slaves). Secondly your talking about the FALL of the roman empire, by that time the poor could only vote for tribunes (who could only veto) and the empire was rulled by a dictator. It wasn't "socialist" economicly, nor a democracy politicaly. Lastly the phrase "for the general welfare" in article 1 section 8 is hardly unimportant.
wotmot223 11 months ago
@wotmot223 For you and your ilk, "for the general welfare" is a very big deal. Those four words in our Constitution form a vague intent that is taken out of context and used to refute the entire rest of our Constitution and its specific prohibitions that would prevent the federal government from doing 90% or more of the things they do. Our Constitution lists 18 enumerated powers, and any that aren't specifically named are not the proper role of the federal government. Example: Obamacare
Liberty4Ever 11 months ago
@wotmot223 PS - Funny that you misspelled "ignorant". :-)
You also misspelled "circus", "their", "Rome", and "Caesar"... and you ended your final sentence with a preposition.
Oh yeah... As a high school senior, I won first place in the 1978 Junior Classical League state competition for Roman Culture and Civilization. Really. I did! Four years of high school Latin, and over three decades later I use that knowledge to argue with internet trolls! :-)
Are we done here?
Liberty4Ever 1 year ago
are you kidding me? The nazi party was less socialist than most current european nations, and less socialist than the US was at the same time. I will look for the book you recomended but if it speaks of the nazi's as being an ill example of socialism than you might want to reconsider the value of the book. The nazi's were evil because they killed people, not because the had socialist programs (and they were a facist dictatorship, not a socialist nation for goodness sakes)
wotmot223 1 year ago
It's an oddity of human history that societies coalesce around free market capitalism and they thrive, but inevitably become increasingly socialist as there is so much to share and nobody seems to mind when socialists first suggest that we spread the wealth, but invariably, the more the wealth is spread, the less incentive there is to create the wealth and it all crumbles. That point, in the US, is labeled YOU ARE HERE.
Socialism killed the Roman empire and the USSR, and many more in between.
Liberty4Ever 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever yup, except for the part where there were 10s of thousands of years of people before capitalism. I'm guessing by your logic they didn't actually exist.
hornylink 1 year ago
@hornylink Barter and trade are as old as recorded history. It's the basis of free market capitalism. So I don't have a clue what you're talking about. As for the advantages of socialism... almost all of that stuff is better done person to person. Put government in the middle, and 50% or more is wasted in bureaucratic overhead, and a lot of the rest goes to the wrong place... AND the money that people would use to help others charitably was wasted on big government.
Liberty4Ever 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever lol, unless your poor, or starving, or dying from lack of medicine. Gods man, honestly could you spend maybe ten hours studying the history of the US? The US has had "socialist" programs since 1792. As for charity making up the difference, go tell it to the irish from the great famine. Get informed, less embarassing to you
wotmot223 1 year ago
@wotmot223 I've studied the long history of socialism in the US. It has been an irregularly recurring problem throughout US history. For a quick read, I recommend "Not Yours To Give" by Davey Crockett. It's online.
The height of US interest in socialism peaked in the 1930s, but one look at Germany's National SOCIALIST Party (the Nazis) caused the US to detour from the socialist path to tyranny, financial ruin, and wide scale human suffering. 65 years later, we're forgetting that lesson.
Liberty4Ever 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever The German NATIONAL Socialist party first and foremost were not socialists. They multiple times considered removing Socialist from the name. Socialist stayed in the name for the simple sake that they wished to take the wealth from the Jews and give it to the Aryans. The Nazi party originates from the right wing militant Fatherland party. Which came from the German right wing conservative movement that existed since 1803. The Socialists were the first Hitler had killed for a logical
CrackCityRocker1211 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever Socialists wish class warfare and unity among humans, which is in contrast with what the Nazi's wished. The Nazi's wished for a classed society with a high, middle and lower class. They also wished for a society that was highly nationalistic. Socialism is not fascism. They are opposites in theory and they are opposites in history. Need further prove remember 1936. The fascists and right wingers did not wish the socialists, communists and anarchists who had won the election to
CrackCityRocker1211 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever rule the country. Thus they began a war during which Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy funded the right wingers to continue their endeavor to control the country. During this war capitalist Americans also funded the right wing nationalists to overthrow the government. Socialism was a disease to them that needed stopped. Fascism offered a position of unprecedented wealth for them due its classed society and nationalism allowing them to not fear unions or socialists.
CrackCityRocker1211 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever The Right Wing may try its best to focus on the fact one of the many fascist parties had the word socialist in its name. The Spanish Republicans were socialists. Therefore all Republicans must be socialists regardless of their actual policies. The right shall never white wash history despite their best endeavors. I recommend reading a real book instead of right wing rhetoric which is lies used to justify their position.
CrackCityRocker1211 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever The USSR, yes, roman empire, try millitaristic. Yes, socialism doesn't work I agree, but america is not there. There is nothing wrong with making sure growth lifts the poor out of poverty, having a safety net to make sure you don't have to work 70 hours a week to make ends meet, and giving everyong the tools to succeed in a capitalist system. It's called socail capitalism, and it works.
TheDcrat 1 year ago
@Liberty4Ever oh....my.... GOD! Anyone, and I mean ANYONE who thinks that the roman empire was "socialist" in any sense of the word is almost certainly barfing up either Glen Beck or the (insanse) version of "history" taught by the john birtch society! The USSR one can I think claim to be socialist, and yes, pure socialism is a problem, I don't advocate for it. But social programs do more for this nation, than harm to it.
wotmot223 1 year ago
@wotmot223 If you don't think socialism significantly contributed to the fall of the Roman empire, do an online search for "bread and circuses" and read the Wikipedia article. Once ANY society learns that 51% of the people can vote to steal from the other 49% via the force of government (aka "redistribute the wealth"), it's all over. We're living in the time that future history books will refer to as The Fall of the American Empire.
Liberty4Ever 1 year ago
I can tell few of you read any classic text on socialist and known that socialist is supose to get rid of classes money and capital intell the state witheraway no take over propeity and capital
wewantpot010 1 year ago
Oh, I see there are intelligent people in America. Too...
DrUmSensitive 1 year ago
@DrUmSensitive We're just by nature quieter than the loud-mouthed idiots. We often follow the old adage "it's better to be thought a quiet fool than to open your mouth and prove it", so often times the more intelligent in a group are quietly thinking while everyone around them is screaming until the very end and then solve everything in a sentence or two (think a population of Jays and Silent Bobs; that's America).
Truthiness231 1 year ago
Socialism is a good thing for a country - Why im a socialist :D
wensel911 1 year ago
sarcasm is overly use or over simplified. because this just seems stupid to me. basically we are a socialist if we use any public facilities or government run thing. just because i believe the road im driving on should not have been made by the government. doesn't mean i am going to drive off road through the woods to get where i need to get.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17 This isn't sarcasm its satire. I've argued with some of your fellow Americans who have posted on this vid and said the only "service" the government should offer is protection (police and military) this is a satirical critique of that arguement.
Caracalla23 1 year ago
@trevorzlee Of course it won't happen, cause different nations have different elements of different ideologies, no country is only one colour, all the nations are rainbow-ish.
For example, People's Republic of China is a Communistic nation, but it has aspects which are capitalistic.
AinEstonia 1 year ago
@trevorzlee Having things such as public roads, schools, parks or public healthcare may not make that nation a socialistic nation, but they are things nonetheless that one could describe to be of 'socialist' nature.
AinEstonia 1 year ago
@AinEstonia Having public roads,schools,parks, libraries and universal healthcare don't make a society socialist they make a society civilised.
Caracalla23 1 year ago 42
@Caracalla23 Agreed.
AinEstonia 1 year ago
@Caracalla23 ...and there's NOTHING more civilised than socialism. Good point. Thank you.
DrUmSensitive 1 year ago
@Caracalla23 but they are still socialist polocies
Yahweigh 10 months ago
@Caracalla23
Those are all Socialist policies.
nerdude1010 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Caracalla23 "Having public roads,schools,parks, libraries and universal healthcare don't make a society socialist they make a society civilised."
You imply a distinction where none exists.
dsmelsergmailcom 10 months ago
@Caracalla23
There's a key issue you're overlooking.
Socialism is NOT a bad thing. Just look at Europe. (The standard of living for middle and poor class people is actually HIGHER here.)
TheSkunkCat 10 months ago 5
@Caracalla23 The things you listed are definitely socialist ideas. Socialism is demonized in America still; lingering propaganda from the Cold War against our Communist/Socialist enemies, I guess. Fact is, the socialism Marx wrote about is a fantastic idea-- Marx would roll in his grave if he could see how horrendously Lenin (et al.) actually implemented it.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with our tax dollars being used to benefit the community at large.
LockeXIII 10 months ago
@LockeXIII The reason socialism is demonized in America is because of people like you who lump socialism and communism together. Socialism and communism are two separate forms of government. In socialism, while having big government take care of their people, there is still a free market that includes competition. In a socialist market any one person can decide to open a business of their choice. In communism everyone works for the government, with no competition.
thatissomeBS 9 months ago
@thatissomeBS Again, I'm referring to the Communism and Socialism Marx wrote about in the Communist Manifesto. TRUE Communism is a completely stateless society, utilizing a direct democracy in which the people themselves vote on issues, without the need for representatives.
Also, Socialism is not system of governance. It's a system of economics.
LockeXIII 9 months ago
@Caracalla23
Yes, and socialism is the civil way of going about things. In the current system people get massive amounts of money by making other people lose massive amounts of money, and having money gives one the means to siphon more money from people, usually in a malicious yet legal fashion. In essence, unregulated finance and currency give people the means, motive, and opportunity to exploit others. How is that civil?
drsexyfox 9 months ago
@Caracalla23 actually it does, and there's nothing wrong with that
adsamail 9 months ago
Hurricane Roy.
breaneainn 1 year ago
@trevorzlee It's called satire.
paulaegraham 1 year ago
I'm a Tea Partying, Republican voting, free-market loving, capitalist. I hate Teddy Roosevelt, Nixon, and some of Eisenhower's actions. Thanks for dispelling that myth.
AtoZor0through9 1 year ago
I'm liberal, and I'm all for capitalism and free markets. However, to some how think companies and markets are going to regulate themselves is naive. I've heard some like Rand Paul say the government didn't have a right to tell private businesses that they had to serve black people as well as white. He claimed that the free market would of taken care of it because people who didn't approve wouldn't dine in those restaurants....yeah, ok....
There are thinks that only government can do.
nlgatewood 1 year ago 20
@trevorzlee
Hear hear!
PS I dig Roy too!
tuttt99 1 year ago
Ever notice that with more government spending than ever before, there's less money for essential services than ever before?
Why is that?
tuttt99 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@tuttt99
Because most of that money goes into the military.
mastersausagemaker 1 year ago
Hate on capitalism all you want, but it works far better than socialism.
RockBanned 1 year ago
@RockBanned
This statement is ridiculous.
Socialism can coexist with capitalism. Many criticisms of capitalism from socialists have to do with American capitalism and its consumer culture and lack of basic social programmes such as universal healthcare. Once again, these concepts, while being socialist, can exist in a capitalist nation.
The degree is the important factor. Public libraries are examples of socialist principles employed by a state.
mastersausagemaker 1 year ago
@mastersausagemaker I agree. However, my basic point is that, in most cases, you should let the market run things instead of an authoritarian state.
RockBanned 1 year ago
@RockBanned
History generally does not support this. Most successful markets survive because of direct government intervention. Indeed, this may be the pragmatic reality for large states.
Unless you mean a severely controlled and restrictive market like... North Korea. Then I agree.
mastersausagemaker 1 year ago
Roy is a master of adjectives. No one else has ever used "nanny-statin'" as an adjective. ever.
instereovideos 1 year ago
"This video contains Nazi imagery. It's not available in your country." WTF?
Supenmanu 1 year ago
I'm so socialist I only look left when crossing the road
MelleB90 1 year ago
my grand mother, daisey Viloletta, had.a.singer.it.was.a.sewing.machine
please.do.not.sue : Sue.boy...u.not.A.tube
u.ya-no.s
theosophers 1 year ago
You like this video? Why? I'll tell ya why. You're a socialist! :)
suniseclipsed 1 year ago 39
National socialist party how much better would we be if it wasent for them
answer : About 70 million people
darkblood626 1 year ago
@darkblood626 True, but it wasn't the socialism that caused the nazis to do what they did, it was the nationalism. Having a nationalist romantic fantasy of power and prosperity only leads to destruction. There are many examples of this - Roman empire, Nazi-Germany, Stalin's Russia, North Korea, Neo-conservative America etc...
kioskvaltare 1 year ago
@kioskvaltare IN that case why did Stalin do it too?
paulaegraham 1 year ago
@paulaegraham Something called Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Well, either that or he was a psychopath. The difference in behaviour isn't too great.
kioskvaltare 1 year ago
Do you watch YouTube? ... SOCIALIST!
I love this song, can't get enough of it.
PirateFish1 1 year ago