Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

***Warlord*** · 10-09-2019, 10:31 PM

***Imperius3*** · 10-10-2019, 10:56 AM

Is Elizabeth Warren really a socialist? I was having this discussion the other day.

I say no, she's not, because socialism means public ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. This was printed on the membership card of the UK Labour Party back when it was a socialist party. Socialism does not mean higher marginal income tax rates, law school dweeb regulators, and government programs. And does anyone know what her income tax plan is? Searching for it just brings up her (in)famous wealth tax, which wouldn't affect me since my net worth is below $50 million.

I am not a fan of Warren's ideas in general because they rely on lots of law professor dweebs (to take a totally random example -- Elizabeth Warren) to produce copious tomes of regulations to try to micromanage business in an effort to reduce risk and exploitation. Sometimes such an approach is regrettably necessary, but I prefer simpler solutions like banning payday lending outright.

Neither Elizabeth nor Bernie exist in a vacuum however, and they've come to the fore because of the new gilded age we live in. Most economic gains in the past generation have gone the capitalist class and a small number of highly remunerated managers. At the same time some of the basic costs of middle class life like higher education, healthcare, and housing (in some metros) have soared in cost.

Republicans ought to be putting forth our own ideas to address this instead of just ranting about SOCIALISM like it's still the 1980's.

***Warlord*** · 10-10-2019, 03:53 PM

(10-10-2019 10:56 AM)Imperius3 Wrote: Is Elizabeth Warren really a socialist? I was having this discussion the other day.

Yes.

Quote:I say no, she's not, because socialism means public ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. This was printed on the membership card of the UK Labour Party back when it was a socialist party.

Ted Cruz has been notorious with one simple question he has asked Democrats, over and over, and which has always stumped them. What's the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist?

If Bernie Sanders, an avowed Socialist running for President as a nominal Democrat, can't answer that question, what does it tell you?

What do you think "public ownership" means, I guess I should ask. Your definition (if it is correct) will answer your question on whether or not Warren (or any other Democrat) is a Socialist or not.

Quote:Socialism does not mean higher marginal income tax rates, law school dweeb regulators, and government programs.

Just so we're clear, what do you mean by government programs? Because abolishing private insurance and establishing government-run healthcare looks an awful lot like Socialism to me.

One of the things people don't understand is that the Left is playing the long game (and has been for decades) when it comes to Socialism in America. It was never going to happen overnight. Going back to the Frankfurt School of thought, the intention was always to chip away at American institutions and American values a piece at a time. Infiltrating the education system, the entertainment industry, and politics as means of controlling the narrative are some of their most effective methods at doing this.

Quote:the basic costs of middle class life like higher education, healthcare, and housing (in some metros) have soared in cost.

All of those issues can be traced back to government meddling, specifically minimum wage laws, over-regulation of business, and unnecessary intrusion into healthcare and education. If we could get the government out of all those private sectors, the private sectors themselves could do an infinitely better job at getting costs down for the consumer.

Quote:Republicans ought to be putting forth our own ideas to address this instead of just ranting about SOCIALISM like it's still the 1980's.

Republicans have put forward many ideas. If you haven't heard them, then you're just getting your news from the mainstream media.

Tell me an issue that is important to you and I'll give you the Republican viewpoint on it, and any bills or suggested bills that have been put forward.

***Imperius3*** · 10-10-2019, 07:38 PM

(10-10-2019 03:53 PM)Warlord Wrote: Yes.

Ted Cruz has been notorious with one simple question he has asked Democrats, over and over, and which has always stumped them. What's the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist?

If Bernie Sanders, an avowed Socialist running for President as a nominal Democrat, can't answer that question, what does it tell you?

For starters it's a loaded question and not particularly useful in an intellectual sense, though as a point of rhetoric it is of course excellent.

The difference between a Democrat and a socialist, a real one, on taxes is that the socialist would suggest eliminating taxes because they would no longer be required in a society in which the state owns all property.

Bernie Sanders, to my knowledge, does not propose eliminating the private sector. He does propose reducing its scope. As I recall he opposes investor-owned utilities, so he could be fairly said to want more socialism in America than we currently have. Him calling himself a socialist is just branding in my view, though it's possible he's spent decades thinking about just how much socialism Americans are willing to accept and made his peace with that.

Quote:What do you think "public ownership" means, I guess I should ask. Your definition (if it is correct) will answer your question on whether or not Warren (or any other Democrat) is a Socialist or not.

Just so we're clear, what do you mean by government programs? Because abolishing private insurance and establishing government-run healthcare looks an awful lot like Socialism to me.

Public ownership means that the state owns the assets. Within the United States an example of that is the Tennessee Valley Authority.

"Government-run healthcare" as typically proposed in the United States involves replacing private sector intermediaries with the state, as in Canada and Australia (or as is done with the elderly and indigent in our own country). I've never heard anyone propose enacting complete government-run healthcare here on the Beveridge model as with Britain's NHS.

Most of what Americans think of is socialism is just welfarism. A real socialist candidate for President would be calling for nationalizing Amazon, Google, General Motors, Walmart, JP Morgan Chase, etc.

Quote:One of the things people don't understand is that the Left is playing the long game (and has been for decades) when it comes to Socialism in America. It was never going to happen overnight. Going back to the Frankfurt School of thought, the intention was always to chip away at American institutions and American values a piece at a time. Infiltrating the education system, the entertainment industry, and politics as means of controlling the narrative are some of their most effective methods at doing this.

All of those issues can be traced back to government meddling, specifically minimum wage laws, over-regulation of business, and unnecessary intrusion into healthcare and education. If we could get the government out of all those private sectors, the private sectors themselves could do an infinitely better job at getting costs down for the consumer.

Republicans have put forward many ideas. If you haven't heard them, then you're just getting your news from the mainstream media.

Tell me an issue that is important to you and I'll give you the Republican viewpoint on it, and any bills or suggested bills that have been put forward.

Yes, I am sure minimum wage laws are responsible for healthcare inflation substantially exceeding the CPI for generations. C'mon, are you 65 years old?

I personally don't consume much healthcare or education at this point, and I don't live in a coastal area with expensive housing. I'm economically secure. I do know that Americans bitch endlessly about their healthcare and that higher education is a disgraceful scam. My #1 political priority is ending all illegal immigration, which no elected Republican official is willing to touch.

You can still find hardcore old school leftists who want to establish socialism (maybe even our dear friend Bernard), but most of the so-called left today simply hates straight white men.

***the ollie reed fan club*** · 10-10-2019, 08:22 PM

(10-10-2019 07:38 PM)Imperius3 Wrote: For starters it's a loaded question and not particularly useful in an intellectual sense, though as a point of rhetoric it is of course excellent.

The difference between a Democrat and a socialist, a real one, on taxes is that the socialist would suggest eliminating taxes because they would no longer be required in a society in which the state owns all property.

Bernie Sanders, to my knowledge, does not propose eliminating the private sector. He does propose reducing its scope. As I recall he opposes investor-owned utilities, so he could be fairly said to want more socialism in America than we currently have. Him calling himself a socialist is just branding in my view, though it's possible he's spent decades thinking about just how much socialism Americans are willing to accept and made his peace with that.

Public ownership means that the state owns the assets. Within the United States an example of that is the Tennessee Valley Authority.

"Government-run healthcare" as typically proposed in the United States involves replacing private sector intermediaries with the state, as in Canada and Australia (or as is done with the elderly and indigent in our own country). I've never heard anyone propose enacting complete government-run healthcare here on the Beveridge model as with Britain's NHS.

Most of what Americans think of is socialism is just welfarism. A real socialist candidate for President would be calling for nationalizing Amazon, Google, General Motors, Walmart, JP Morgan Chase, etc.

Yes, I am sure minimum wage laws are responsible for healthcare inflation substantially exceeding the CPI for generations. C'mon, are you 65 years old?

I personally don't consume much healthcare or education at this point, and I don't live in a coastal area with expensive housing. I'm economically secure. I do know that Americans bitch endlessly about their healthcare and that higher education is a disgraceful scam. My #1 political priority is ending all illegal immigration, which no elected Republican official is willing to touch.

You can still find hardcore old school leftists who want to establish socialism (maybe even our dear friend Bernard), but most of the so-called left today simply hates straight white men.

I think the other part of the question is what is a Democrat these days? There is a civil war on in the Dem party and has been since they lost to Trump in 2016. The far left, who are most certainly socialists if not communist, fuck they may be even more to the left of Stalin are trying to hijack the party. The Dem party of 2019 is radically different to the Dem party of only 3 years ago as they lurch further and further leftward, to the extent that middle-of-the-road dems are struggling to identify with a party these days. I suspect many of them will vote Trump in 2020 as they find it less frightening than the snake oil being peddled by AOC and the likes.

***lloyd mayflower*** · 10-11-2019, 01:42 AM

Serious question here now, and I base it on the more sensible input of Imperius here... The bit about hatong straight white men struck a chord. Is there separation between left leaning politics and left wing social issues?

It might speak to my frustration at political chat descending into name calling etc these days but perhaps believing in the NHS (for example) can be separated from thinking that everyone has a right to be whatever gender they can dream up amd other social issues like that?

I think left and right wing political ideology needs to be separated from the parties of the day who interpret it differently and also the people who use it as a base to launch cringy twitter causes that serve to further entrench people on both sides...

What I am saying is, I cant accept that wanting a state run healthcare system makes me the same as some bleeding heart SJW. I guess what I am saying is that there are certain politics, the belief in which is left leaning, like the healthcare thing, and thats ok to belive or not believe in.... But there are certain things, like hating straight white men, or saying people have every right to identify as a rainbow unicorn, which supercede political leanings and just make you a traditional idiot.

***Warlord*** · 10-11-2019, 03:45 PM

(10-10-2019 07:38 PM)Imperius3 Wrote: For starters it's a loaded question and not particularly useful in an intellectual sense, though as a point of rhetoric it is of course excellent.

It was not a loaded question. It was a legitimate question to ask an avowed socialist running for president nominally as a Democrat.

Quote:The difference between a Democrat and a socialist, a real one, on taxes is that the socialist would suggest eliminating taxes because they would no longer be required in a society in which the state owns all property.

Who, in your opinion, is/was a "real" socialist?

Quote:Bernie Sanders, to my knowledge, does not propose eliminating the private sector.
He does propose reducing its scope. As I recall he opposes investor-owned utilities, so he could be fairly said to want more socialism in America than we currently have.

He would eliminate the private sector tomorrow if it was within his power. That aside, you clearly understand that Sanders's policies put the United States on the path to socialism, on one hand, and then on the other do not understand why he (or any other mainstream Democrat at the moment) are labeled as socialists. Where is the disconnect?

Quote:Him calling himself a socialist is just branding in my view, though it's possible he's spent decades thinking about just how much socialism Americans are willing to accept and made his peace with that.

The former statement is incorrect, the latter is 100% correct.

Quote:Public ownership means that the state owns the assets.

I find the term "assets" to be a bit vague. Socialism is literally defined as a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.

Where you, and many others, get hung up on conservatives calling Sanders or Warren socialists is because they have not literally (openly) called for outright abolishment of the private sector.

I don't mean this (or anything I've said) insultingly, but that is an incredibly naive position to take. As I said before, and as is obvious to almost everyone (including the Leftists who just attacked Trump supporters while flying Communists flag last night: https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/...s-rally/), the end goal for the Left (and almost any of the mainstream Democrats today) is socialism/communism.

Quote:"Government-run healthcare" as typically proposed in the United States involves replacing private sector intermediaries with the state, as in Canada and Australia (or as is done with the elderly and indigent in our own country). I've never heard anyone propose enacting complete government-run healthcare here on the Beveridge model as with Britain's NHS.

Most of what Americans think of is socialism is just welfarism. A real socialist candidate for President would be calling for nationalizing Amazon, Google, General Motors, Walmart, JP Morgan Chase, etc.

See the above response.

Quote:Yes, I am sure minimum wage laws are responsible for healthcare inflation substantially exceeding the CPI for generations. C'mon, are you 65 years old?

No, minimum wage laws are responsible for accelerated economic inflation. Government intrusion into the healthcare sector is what caused treatment and drug prices to skyrocket.

Most of my family works in the healthcare industry. I'm one of the few who don't (though I did study medicine for four years). Have you ever met anyone in the healthcare industry who didn't/doesn't think government intrusion is the number 1 problem with the healthcare industry today?

If not, what is the problem, and what is the solution, in your opinion?

Quote:I personally don't consume much healthcare or education at this point, and I don't live in a coastal area with expensive housing. I'm economically secure. I do know that Americans bitch endlessly about their healthcare and that higher education is a disgraceful scam. My #1 political priority is ending all illegal immigration, which no elected Republican official is willing to touch.

I think Trump has done nearly everything he can to end it, but the fact is that both parties are corporatist shills.

Quote:You can still find hardcore old school leftists who want to establish socialism (maybe even our dear friend Bernard), but most of the so-called left today simply hates straight white men.

You must not put stock in polls very much. Every recent poll shows support for socialism/communism climbing among young people. I agree they hate straight, white men, but it doesn't stop there. They hate this country, and every thing it stands for.

***Nay_Sayer*** · (This post was last modified: 10-11-2019 05:32 PM by Nay_Sayer.)

(10-10-2019 07:38 PM)Imperius3 Wrote: but most of the so-called left today simply hates straight white men.

If that's true then is it fair to generalize most of the right and assume that they hate minorities and immigrants?

(10-09-2019 04:37 PM)Warlord Wrote: Western civilization, on the other hand, is a living, breathing culture. When you speak English, you're speaking my culture. When you put your clothes on in the morning, you're wearing my culture. When you eat breakfast, lunch, dinner, or a snack, you're eating my culture. When you drive to work, take the bus, subway, or airplane, you're doing it because of my culture. While other cultures dreamed of going to the stars, my culture went there. We put men on the moon while your stack of bricks in Egypt lay still and silent in the dust.

Lets have a look at Western "Civilization", shall we?

Quote:Opioid Crisis Fast Facts

(CNN)Here's a look at the opioid crisis.

Experts say the United States is in the throes of an opioid epidemic. In 2017, an estimated 1.7 million individuals in the United States suffered from substance use disorders related to prescription opioid pain relievers and 652,000 suffered from a heroin use disorder.

During 2017, there were more than 70,200 overdose deaths in the United States and 47,600 of those overdose deaths involved opioids. More than 130 people died every day from opioid-related drug overdoses in 2016 and 2017, according to the US Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).

According to two national surveys conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, covering 78,000 visits to emergency rooms and outpatient clinics by teens and young adults between 2005 and 2015, 15% of ER visits and three percent of outpatient visits resulted in an opioid prescription.

The International Narcotics Control Board reports that the United States is the country with the highest consumption of hydrocodone. In 2017, about 99.2% of total global hydrocodone consumption was in America.

An estimated 10.3 million Americans aged 12 and older misused opioids in 2018, including 9.9 million prescription pain reliever abusers and 808,000 heroin users.

People who become dependent on pain pills may switch to heroin because it is less expensive than prescription drugs. Individuals who are addicted to prescription opioids are 40 times more likely to become addicted to heroin.

From 2010 to 2017, heroin overdose deaths increased five-fold.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/18/health/op...index.html

Quote:How the US military's opium war in Afghanistan was lost
By Justin Rowlatt
BBC News

The US has spent $1.5m (£1.15m) a day since 2001 fighting the opium war in Afghanistan. So why is business still booming?

But, according to new research from the London School of Economics, Operation Iron Tempest was not what it seemed.

The study found that, despite excellent intelligence, the multi-million-dollar campaign was having a negligible effect on the Taliban and the drug trafficking networks in Afghanistan.

So, what were the Americans actually attacking?

That was the question Dr David Mansfield asked himself when he first watched that opening salvo in the campaign.

His conclusion is surprising. Despite the incredible resources the American military were pouring in, Dr Mansfield and his team are now convinced that the US Air Force was using 21st century fighter jets to bomb little more than mud huts.

A booming heroin industry
Opium is woven deeply into the fabric of the conflict in Afghanistan, now the longest war in American history.

The profits from the heroin it produces are used to fund the Taliban, as well as terrorist groups like the so-called Islamic State and Al Qaeda.

And heroin also drives the rampant corruption that is so corrosive to civil society in Afghanistan.

Growing opium is a very serious crime in Afghanistan, punishable with death, yet here was a policeman welcoming a BBC reporter to a poppy field at the height of the harvest.

Record output
By 2017, the evidence of the Allied failure to contain opium production had become impossible to ignore.

Four days before Iron Tempest began in November 2017, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) had announced that poppy cultivation had risen more than 120,000 hectares in a single season.

When US and British forces invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 poppies were grown on around 74,000 hectares - 285 square miles.

The new figures showed production had increased more than four-fold in 15 years: now opium was being grown on 328,000 hectares - 1,266 square miles.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47861444

"Western civilization, built on ignorance." - Fela Kuti

***the ollie reed fan club*** · 10-11-2019, 06:29 PM

(10-11-2019 04:53 PM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: If that's true then is it fair to generalize most of the right and assume that they hate minorities and immigrants?

Lets have a look at Western "Civilization", shall we?

"Western civilization, built on ignorance." - Fela Kuti

Bro you sure you want to play this game? Maybe America could solve it's opioid epidemic if only it would bring over some of those African witch doctors that cure Aids with a lil black magic, LOL.

Out of a bunch of retarded arguments you've made this is about the most spastic of them all. I get it though you're one of those people that hates your own country.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/d...appeal2005

Quote:Zambia struggles with power of witchdoctors
MSF is educating southern Africans about the cause of Aids and effective treatment

- March 2006: read an update on the Nchelenge project
John Vidal in Nchelenge

Wed 28 Dec 2005 16.45 GMTFirst published on Wed 28 Dec 2005 16.45 GMT
Shares
3
When Philimon Banda fell ill last year in his small village on the edge of Lake Mweru in northern Zambia, he went to 15 local witchdoctors who all told him he had been possessed. One said he had a snake in his body drinking his blood, another that he had been inhabited by a ghost, a third that he had been bewitched by jealous neighbours.
They took his money, washed his evil spirits away, exorcised him and gave him roots and powders. But he got progressively weaker until, he said, by early this year he could not even walk.

Five months ago Mr Banda was tested positive for HIV by Médecins sans Frontières and put on antiretroviral drugs, which have saved his life. He is now strong enough to work and angry with the healers. "It was very wrong of them to promise they could cure me," he said.

But the power of traditional healers in northern Zambia, where up to 25% of the population is HIV-infected, is enormous. People go to them first and treatment can be fatally delayed - something that bothers the witchdoctors, too.

"It's a very old disease which we call umukola," said Chishimba Kilimanjaro, a prominent Congolese witchdoctor who has been exorcising spirits to cure people of the disease for years near Nchelenge. "It can be caused by people bewitching each other, or be passed from a dead man's wife to his family. It is easy to diagnose and treat but everything depends on how long the ghost has been in the body. The only people who cannot be helped are ones who - like Mr Banda - only come when the illness is far advanced," he says.

He attracts people from all over Zambia and Congo to his circle of 15 straw huts by the lake and claims to be able to cure them if they come early enough. He will not say if he saw Mr Banda.

Western and traditional medicine in Zambia are culturally miles apart, but both camps agree that attitudes to sex, health, wealth and death have helped HIV to spread. Changes in cultural practices are needed and doctors of different disciplines must cooperate. Dr Kilimanjaro, like many other healers, now sends people with advanced Aids to MSF.

"HIV is largely spread round here because of polygamy," said Moses Banda, an HIV-infected teacher. "Our culture accepts that a man can have five or more wives. That means that the disease can be spread very far. Then there's the widespread practice of dry sex. Women apply traditional plants to their private parts which makes it more stimulating for the man. But this can lead to abrasions and tears," he says.

Even riskier, say many people, is the southern African practice of "sexual cleansing", to get rid of the ghost of a dead spouse. In Zambia, it usually means that the wife of a dead man must have sex with his brother, sending the infection through communities. It has been officially banned by most local chiefs and the Zambian government. "Things change slowly, but it is still very common here," said Moses Banda.

"There are so many cultural misconceptions," said Fancy, a counsellor at MSF's Bum Bwesu information centre. "Some people think there is no such thing as HIV, others that you become infected as a result of sleeping with a widow. They believe it is a ghost that is haunting them ... People are afraid to be tested but the most afraid are the middle classes. They do not want to be tested and are very afraid of being shamed. The best thing we can do is give people information. Happily, there is much less stigma now. Just four years ago people thought that they could catch HIV/Aids from being in the MSF car. People are more open about their status now"

Elizabeth Senkwewmenya, the district coordinator of the Zambian Peoples Living With Aids group, is HIV positive. She visits communities, encouraging and educating groups of infected people. She said: "Men are frightened. Women are vulnerable. The poor are desperate. They really do not want to know, even if it means dying. Some men are polygamists. A lot of poor women are so desperate that they go with people who have money. People fear going to clinics, fear having fingers pointed at them, they think that they will not feel the same if they put a condom on. Some men believe that if you sleep with a young woman you will be cured. Others that if you eat African potatoes you will get better. Imagine.

"People are dying just because of misconceptions and lack of information. As they learn, so they lose their fear. We are beginning to change how people think. It's much more positive now."

· On Saturday Jonathan Steele reports from Nigeria on MSF's campaign for

***ViperSniper*** · 10-11-2019, 07:09 PM

Fela Kuti is the goodies!!