Socialist : an insult ?

[Robert Snow]

Ok Robert, I know you are MP's cronie but I didn't know you yapped for Matt too. Fighting and paying for a war and paying the way for a dead beat are two totally different issues.

There is no telling who I might "yap" for; if I agree and feel inclined to post, I do it.

 

[Spear]

Spoken like a true non-centered countryman who's country has never won a war except for the French Revolution. Yeah, right, we're so self-centered that we liberted your country twice. But of course it was all just a capitalistic ploy to make money.

Ah, you got the occasion to use that good old taunt ! Congratulations, you made it !

I know, some time ago, you would have added " you didn't come in Irak, you traitors, to find and destroy the WOMD ". I heard it before, i even felt it once i was in Ireland for holidays and met american people whose reaction was clear when we told we were french. But i'm sure that even if there were no WOMD (even if i'm sure some wished there were to keep the face), some found a way to justify things (and none will ever say " you were true about that ").

To put things back in their context, like quoted in my post, you were asking Matt why do british care about what's going on in USA, then i replied you we are not self-centered, and the economy is global.

You took the occasion to taunt the " french " guy, and take the occasion to put things on the " war " side, as if a nation had strength or merit by making and winning war.

I truly thank the american, the canadian, the british, and all the helping nations for their help during WWII & WWI.

We were by your side in Gulf War 1 (if i remember well, french had the highest number of hours of flight with aircraft). We were by your side and still are in Eastern Europe, mostly in Yougoslavia. We are by your side in Afghanistan. We are in many places in Africa and US Army counts on french army for its experience over there.

In all of these conflicts, if you think that these were US-ONLY victories for those which are over, the it's sad. I honestly would be very disappointed if it is so.

I truly think we're allies, i like USA and american, i'd be the first to agree with helping you in a local conflict (i fear, honestly, and truly, it frightens me to think that ... that you doubt we would help you ... true ?).

I always have that feeling of a friend who gives you something and will endlessly remind you what he did, as if we said " But remember, you owe us and eternal debt because we helped you get independence ".

That's just not my way of thinking. We can be true friends and remain free in our ways of thinking without treason. We can be true friends and disagree about what to do. You're my brothers and sisters in Jesus, and even if you weren't, you're a friendly nation, i support you even if you don't believe it or are skeptical. I'm simply different, but i listen to your arguments, i'm curious about the way things work or don't over there, then we debate. That's all.

Yeah, that's the breaks. You got it. All 10,000 of them will just turn over and cry to the government to help them. None will use what they know to find new jobs or create their own companies. Dang Americans, just a bunch of whiners.

A worker, 55 years old with many of his colleagues (some much younger) in a full/closed market will have it hard to find a job with the knowledge/ experience he has and so many concurrents asking for the same at the same time.
Everyone has the right to have bad times, and everyone has the right to whine in such a situation. I guess it might be scaring.

Who will pay? The investors in the bank. Why should it be the tax-payers who have nothing invested in that interprise? The 'rent of workers'? We don't pay for that here. You are thinking of your own country.
The grandpa and grandmas will just have to suck it up like the rest of the people. And since most of them went through our 'Great Depression', I'm sure most of them do not only have all their assets in one bank and will survive.

Yeah, so why shouldn't we continue, let's not change anything ! Let's start over again with the same rules !

Tell that to the Jews at Chrystallnacht(SP?)

No comment.

 

[alatide]

​

Where in my post do you see me make the claim "America has always been a corporate fascist state"?​

What's the difference between "free market" and fascist alatide? The answer I think would be control. ​

Free market, ​

An economic market in which supply and demand are not regulated or are regulated with only minor restrictions.​

Fascist,​

Government and business or in our case, business and government merged. (this is Mussolini's definition)​

Contrary to popular belief the government is not at the top of the power structure in the United States, the international banking cartels and transnational corporations are. They have "control" over the government and therefore are able to set their owns rules in order to manipulate the market to their advantage. So much so that it has gone beyond simple leverage to theft on a grand scale. ​

Incidentally, the international banking cartels and transnational corporations have their own huge marketing and advertizing machine to convince you that this is how things are meant to be and everything is being done in your best interest, which is a gargantuan lie of course.​

This monumental propaganda machine is called the mainstream corporate media (only 5 or 6 mega consolidated corporations control the lion's share of it). It's a tool like any other. It has a specific purpose. That purpose is to dumb us down, divide us, distract us and condition us the same way as Palov conditioned his dogs.

Yes, I think control is what makes up the difference between "free market" and fascist.​

This was your description of a corporate controlled fascist state:

1. It is a system where business interests and motives are held supreme over the interests of the public – usually leading to detrimental impacts on the public good.

Most free market capitalists argue that there should be no constraints placed on corporations to reduce their harmful impact on the environment or to make them use fair and equitable treatment in hiring and promotion practices, correct? These are but two examples in which the good of the corporation is held to be more important than the good of the individual. Another is in reducing taxes on corporations and raising them on individuals.

I made my my statement from applying your definition to what has really happened in America. I didn't come up with the definition. You did. I don't agree with its logical conclusion.

 

[poncho]

This was your description of a corporate controlled fascist state:

1. It is a system where business interests and motives are held supreme over the interests of the public – usually leading to detrimental impacts on the public good.

Most free market capitalists argue that there should be no constraints placed on corporations to reduce their harmful impact on the environment or to make them use fair and equitable treatment in hiring and promotion practices, correct? These are but two examples in which the good of the corporation is held to be more important than the good of the individual. Another is in reducing taxes on corporations and raising them on individuals.

I made my my statement from applying your definition to what has really happened in America. I didn't come up with the definition. You did. I don't agree with its logical conclusion.

Okay, so you don't agree with logical conclusions I understand that, but I must say you have a strange way of disagreeing with them.

 

[LadyEagle]

OH MY!!! 17 pages??? I'm checking back in & this thread is closed! :tongue3: