Sweatin' With the Socialists

Get your copy today. An exercise video that will keep you up on your feet for hours to the voice of your favorite president, Barack Obama! Join Nancy Pelosi as she leads you through thousands of annoying exuberant clapping exercises to the voice of President Obama. Spring into action as Pelosi keeps you on your feet during this highly engaging video.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Nancy Pelosi
• Pelosi
• 920 WHJJ
• Helen Glover
• Glover
• exercise video
• state of the union
• clapping
• annoying
• socialists
• democrats

[CK3890]

@cannotbebothered100 Socialism does not at all abolish price systems. Socialism is private ownership of captial, but it does not hinder free market. Even though we can drink our socialist tap water, we are still free to drink capitalist bottled water. The price of capitalist water does not have a direct relationship with socialist water because we are free to not pay into any of these social programs. That's the difference. Communism means no choice. Socialism you have one.

[CK3890]

@cannotbebothered100 What you refer to is COMMUNISM. I went over this thoroughly. Communism is when ALL of the means of production is divided EVENLY among EVERYONE. Notice the capital words. Socialism is when SOME (a percentage) of the means of production is divided PORPORTIONALLY among only THOSE WHO PAID INTO IT.

Socialism does not make anyone poorer. Every socialist fund (social security, medicare, etc.) is again redistrubted at a later time. They are investments.

[cannotbebothered100]

@CK3890

Read what I posted elsewhere on social economisation

"just as other people's purchase of food, lower cost if not discriminating and higher cost if they want rarer ingredients preventing the capital being put to other uses, does not impinge on your specific inclusions/exclusions from being attainable by trade with those who know how to economically serve that want." If you force x 2 pay's y cost or 2 subsidise inefficient use of capital output per input falls and we all suffer

[cannotbebothered100]

@CK3890

, Socialism proper totally removes that price signal direction of how to produce/what qualities justify using up of what capital, so Socialism could not function as a system of social cooperation in an extended broad division of labour, unless private dispersed knowledge could be informally exchanged without price signals @ the speed @ which price signals update people on changing scarcities & changing values attainable through specific resource usages relative 2 people's wants.

[cannotbebothered100]

@CK3890

as for Socialism proper, aside from interventionism which removes the social ability through property rights to have prices strictly induced by purely voluntary exchange to allow people to know how to regulate their behaviour to be more in tune with others and to have rentiers make profit only where their selections and rulings raise good opportunities and include in exchange what should be encouraged and exclusion of what would cause harm in mutual proximity to buyers/tenants

[cannotbebothered100]

if they had been, yes, compelled to limit their consumption unless they could find some way to be more productive, to find how to expediently use capital by following low cost signals of capital efficiency in rendering output product and unless they could find some way to reduce costs by following lower insurance premiums and other signals collated from market assessors' knowledge as to how to act & where to locate actions to allow society to bear them with less cost imposed. Now as for

[cannotbebothered100]

@CK3890

His mind is so simple that you prove your fantastic case for Socialism, abolition of the price system deriving from private ownership of capital and product property, by slandering his intelligence. It would seem that you are the 'simple' one here. To set a good example I will back up his anti-Socialism with actual sound theory that you have neglected to learn. Interventionist theft to prevent cost signals from limiting key consumptions makes people poorer than they would be

[CK3890]

@TheMarksmenCat The PRK dissolved in 1946 but that's besides the point. I said nearly every developed nation in the world is a mix of capitalism and socialism. North Korea is hardly developed, and why? Because they are one of the five remaining communist states left in the world. In fact, they are one of two communist states (Cuba being the other) with an almost entirely government-planned, state-owned economy. You helped my argument here. Good job!

[TheMarksmenCat]

@CK3890 yea I can see how developed the PRK is.

[CK3890]

@TheMarksmenCat For the record, GOD DAMN RIGHT I'm a socialist fanboy. Nearly every developed country in the world is a mix of socialism and capitalism. Socialism does more good than your simple mind will ever know. Without socialism, there would be riots every day on every corner in every city.