Why is Trump such a socialist?

[reagansghost]

You'll have to raise you IQ to be able to understand it, BOY.

That you believe what some dumbass told you about them not being the same proves you're below average.

oopsy!...yet another REALLY POPULAR Socialist policy!



Public Opinions on Social Security

Over the years, polls have consistently shown that the American public strongly supports Social Security, across party and demographic lines.

In January 2013, the Academy released Strengthening Social Security: What Do Americans Want?, a groundbreaking public opinion study focusing on Americans’ attitudes about Social Security and preferences for strengthening the program for the future. The report found that Americans overwhelmingly support Social Security and are willing to pay more to preserve and even improve benefits. In 2014, the Academy released an update this survey, Americans Make Hard Choices on Social Security: A Survey with Trade-Off Analysis, the findings of which are presented below.

With 61 million people receiving Social Security benefits, Americans recognize that Social Security is a critical program. Large majorities of Americans say they don’t mind paying Social Security taxes because of the security and stability the benefits provide to millions of retired Americans, disabled individuals, and children and widowed spouses of deceased workers. These findings hold true across party lines (those agreeing include 87% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 72% of Republicans). Americans are also willing to pay for Social Security because they value it for themselves (73%) and their families (73%).


https://www.nasi.org/learn/social-security/public-opinions-social-security

 

[canceled.2021.1]

You and I have a very different view of human nature and of history. Hitler was an authoritarian, and an absolutist. Socialism, without authoritarianism and mixed with Capitalism tends to work well.

History is documented. It isn't my view. As for my view on human nature, it is 100% accurate. I will give you an example. Leftists in states like Commiefornia and New York vote for big government and large taxes thinking initially that they are always "soaking the rich". But liberals never soak the rich, they always soak the little guy. When the reality of liberalism hits these leftists in the pocket, where do they move to? Low tax and low regulation states. For example, you yourself despite all of your crowing about being willing to pay more in taxes actually live in a low tax state. Rana despite all of her self proclaimed loyalty to liberalism actually lives a conservative life and lives in a red state. That is human nature.

As for this "socialism mixed with capitalism", it is a crock of shit. It is like saying there is a mild form of AIDS you can get. If you know the real definition of socialism then you can't have any of it. It will ALWAYS lead to authoritarianism. It has always done so and will always do so. Socialism runs counter to human nature so it must be imposed by force.

And before you bring up Canada and Norway and these Nordic utopias you leftists jack off over, they are not socialist countries. They are capitalist countries with large nanny states. But, they are not socialist in the truest sense of the word

 

[CFM]

oopsy!...yet another REALLY POPULAR Socialist policy!



Public Opinions on Social Security

Over the years, polls have consistently shown that the American public strongly supports Social Security, across party and demographic lines.

In January 2013, the Academy released Strengthening Social Security: What Do Americans Want?, a groundbreaking public opinion study focusing on Americans’ attitudes about Social Security and preferences for strengthening the program for the future. The report found that Americans overwhelmingly support Social Security and are willing to pay more to preserve and even improve benefits. In 2014, the Academy released an update this survey, Americans Make Hard Choices on Social Security: A Survey with Trade-Off Analysis, the findings of which are presented below.

With 61 million people receiving Social Security benefits, Americans recognize that Social Security is a critical program. Large majorities of Americans say they don’t mind paying Social Security taxes because of the security and stability the benefits provide to millions of retired Americans, disabled individuals, and children and widowed spouses of deceased workers. These findings hold true across party lines (those agreeing include 87% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 72% of Republicans). Americans are also willing to pay for Social Security because they value it for themselves (73%) and their families (73%).


https://www.nasi.org/learn/social-security/public-opinions-social-security

Popular to what group, those that refuse to plan for their own retirement.

I won't need SS. I'll take what comes my way because I was required to put into it. Hopefully by doing so, someone that didn't plan and needs it gets less than they need.

 

[Jarod]

Hardly.....just like our founders pointed out...…. A NECASSARY EVIL.....that is best kept as small as possible. The federalist papers are not LAW? Really? They are HISTORY ACTUAL personified. The federalist papers were the companion documents explaining why the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were drafted in a specific language. The federalist papers where presented to the STATES/PEOPLE before they ratified THE LAW that is the Bill of Rights (As in states bill of rights)…...thus, the federalist papers must have been accepted before ratification was possible.

More liberal logic? Federalist 10 explains just why Article four, Section four, Clause one....exists in the Constitution. And what is explained? Socialism/pure democracy does not work......socialism is not compatible with the rights of private liberty and property ownership...and always ends in violent revolution. Just like the 6 violent revolutions exampled in the history actual of Europe over the past 250years. And you demand the US mirror Socialized Europe? Really? Learned nothing from history?

Article 4 Section 4
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

What does that have to do with Socialism???

 

[Truth Detector]

oopsy!...yet another REALLY POPULAR Socialist policy!

Public Opinions on Social Security

Over the years, polls have consistently shown that the American public strongly supports Social Security, across party and demographic lines.

In January 2013, the Academy released Strengthening Social Security: What Do Americans Want?, a groundbreaking public opinion study focusing on Americans’ attitudes about Social Security and preferences for strengthening the program for the future. The report found that Americans overwhelmingly support Social Security and are willing to pay more to preserve and even improve benefits. In 2014, the Academy released an update this survey, Americans Make Hard Choices on Social Security: A Survey with Trade-Off Analysis, the findings of which are presented below.

With 61 million people receiving Social Security benefits, Americans recognize that Social Security is a critical program. Large majorities of Americans say they don’t mind paying Social Security taxes because of the security and stability the benefits provide to millions of retired Americans, disabled individuals, and children and widowed spouses of deceased workers. These findings hold true across party lines (those agreeing include 87% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 72% of Republicans). Americans are also willing to pay for Social Security because they value it for themselves (73%) and their families (73%).
https://www.nasi.org/learn/social-security/public-opinions-social-security

That is Social Welfare you dumb fuck. SS is also a program that the participants PAY into and is supposed to be completely funded by the participants. Although it is Fascist in that the Government FORCES you to participate, it is not the definition of Socialism.

Definition of socialism

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

 

[Jarod]

History is documented. It isn't my view. As for my view on human nature, it is 100% accurate. I will give you an example. Leftists in states like Commiefornia and New York vote for big government and large taxes thinking initially that they are always "soaking the rich". But liberals never soak the rich, they always soak the little guy. When the reality of liberalism hits these leftists in the pocket, where do they move to? Low tax and low regulation states. For example, you yourself despite all of your crowing about being willing to pay more in taxes actually live in a low tax state. Rana despite all of her self proclaimed loyalty to liberalism actually lives a conservative life and lives in a red state. That is human nature.

As for this "socialism mixed with capitalism", it is a crock of shit. It is like saying there is a mild form of AIDS you can get. If you know the real definition of socialism then you can't have any of it. It will ALWAYS lead to authoritarianism. It has always done so and will always do so. Socialism runs counter to human nature so it must be imposed by force.

And before you bring up Canada and Norway and these Nordic utopias you leftists jack off over, they are not socialist countries. They are capitalist countries with large nanny states. But, they are not socialist in the truest sense of the word

What is a socialist in the truest sense of the word? In your view? Pure socialism much like pure capitalism does not work well, I agree with that.

 

[reagansghost]

Popular to what group -- retired people

I won't need SS. and of course you represent all Americans, got it .

continue

 

[CFM]

continue

When you change posts, you're an admitted loser.

But do continue to prove it, boy. Continue to prove I'm your superior in every way.

 

[reagansghost]

When you change posts, you're an admitted loser.

But do continue to prove it, boy. Continue to prove I'm your superior in every way.

deflection ^^

 

[Jarod]

No they don't.

You're one of those idiots that thinks socialism and democratic socialism aren't the same thing.

You are unable to understand Democratic Socialism?

Its simple, it is socialist policies that are enacted by a democratically elected populace, as opposed to traditional 19th Century socialism which was often run by an authoritarian strong-man or Union of workers.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

What is a socialist in the truest sense of the word? In your view? Pure socialism much like pure capitalism does not work well, I agree with that.

I will refer you to the definition of socialism in Webster

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism


Essentially it is the abolition of private property. Now if you want to twist yourself in knots and claim that any regulation is considered socialist, then I reject your premise and see no reason in continuing. I believe in economic freedom. I believe in private property. I believe in free markets. I believe that while not perfect, capitalism as defined by private property, economic freedom and free markets is a mechanism of more prosperity than any other system ever devised by man. It isn't even arguable. That some have more than others does not mitigate the prosperity of those you deem less fortunate. For example, leftists bemoan the billionaire like Gates and Buffett etc. But, their billions don't make me feel any less prosperous or successful.

 

[CFM]

deflection ^^

The deflection was you changing a post. Sign of a goddamn coward. Your mother must be proud of her little pussy.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

You are unable to understand Democratic Socialism?

Its simple, it is socialist policies that are enacted by a democratically elected populace, as opposed to traditional 19th Century socialism which was often run by an authoritarian strong-man or Union of workers.

so you democratically take away private property rights? That is somehow more moral to you than one person doing it? So if 51% of the American people decide that all lawyer practices should be publicly owned and there should be no more private practices you would be OK with that? If 51% of the public decided that no lawyer should make more than $50,000/year you would be ok with that because it was "democratic"?

I bet I could get 51% of the American people to go along with that. People hate lawyers

 

[CFM]

You are unable to understand Democratic Socialism?

Its simple, it is socialist policies that are enacted by a democratically elected populace, as opposed to traditional 19th Century socialism which was often run by an authoritarian strong-man or Union of workers.

It's still socialist policies. You think the manner in which it comes about changes what occurs. That's just stupid.

 

[Jarod]

I will refer you to the definition of socialism in Webster

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism


Essentially it is the abolition of private property. Now if you want to twist yourself in knots and claim that any regulation is considered socialist, then I reject your premise and see no reason in continuing. I believe in economic freedom. I believe in private property. I believe in free markets. I believe that while not perfect, capitalism as defined by private property, economic freedom and free markets is a mechanism of more prosperity than any other system ever devised by man. It isn't even arguable. That some have more than others does not mitigate the prosperity of those you deem less fortunate. For example, leftists bemoan the billionaire like Gates and Buffett etc. But, their billions don't make me feel any less prosperous or successful.

You are simply wrong, its not.. even in in the Merriam-Webster dictionary only one of the 3 definitions cited the abolition of private property.

 

[Nordberg]

Trump had no intention of grounding the planes. he even told Boeing he would not. Then someone pointed out, that if one crashed, he would be held responsible and unlikely to politically survive.

 

[Jarod]

so you democratically take away private property rights? That is somehow more moral to you than one person doing it? So if 51% of the American people decide that all lawyer practices should be publicly owned and there should be no more private practices you would be OK with that? If 51% of the public decided that no lawyer should make more than $50,000/year you would be ok with that because it was "democratic"?

I bet I could get 51% of the American people to go along with that. People hate lawyers

My point is that it has been happening in America for over 250 years, it is part of our culture and Trump himself is doing it. Just yesterday he took property rights away from several American airlines, and you cheered that decision.

 

[Truth Detector]

You are simply wrong, its not.. even in in the Merriam-Webster dictionary only one of the 3 definitions cited the abolition of private property.

merriam-webster:

socialism noun
so·​cial·​ism | \ ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm

Definition of socialism

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

 

[Truth Detector]

Trump had no intention of grounding the planes. he even told Boeing he would not. Then someone pointed out, that if one crashed, he would be held responsible and unlikely to politically survive.

Another load of BULL SHIT!

 

[Truth Detector]

My point is that it has been happening in America for over 250 years, it is part of our culture and Trump himself is doing it. Just yesterday he tool property rights away from several American airlines, and you cheered that decision.

LIE and LAME. Good lord, what is this, when you make a stupid comment and get embarrassed by it, you double down and go full retard?