Big Barenknuckle Traveller Fights

[Colin]

I think we need to also be wary of socialist ideas.

What the **** does that even mean?
The only possible affirmation that someone can take from that sentence is that you believe any kind of wealth distribution is dangerous and harmful.

Say goodbye to the 'socialised' military
police force
school system
etc..

Hell, why not just go back to the Roman system of every rich man having his own army, conquering what the **** ever they want with impunity. I suppose that sounds wonderful to you.

[mike321]

It's not the wealth distribution that I am wary of it is centralizing control of the economy and planning the economy. I don't like "targeted" tax cuts either which is not a socialist idea but reeks of trying to decide how people should spend their money.

Schools police and military in my humble opinion should not be a way to generate wealth so I definitely do not want them privatized. (nor do I want parasitic private enterprises leaching off them)

My point is free market has a proven record of wealth generation and should be the starting point and then regulate from their as little as possible to produce an equitable society.

[JohnnyCache]

What the **** does that even mean?
The only possible affirmation that someone can take from that sentence is that you believe any kind of wealth distribution is dangerous and harmful.

Say goodbye to the 'socialised' military
police force
school system
etc..

Hell, why not just go back to the Roman system of every rich man having his own army, conquering what the **** ever they want with impunity. I suppose that sounds wonderful to you.

It's fine with me. I'm only a liberal on behalf of others

[OZZ]

**** politics..this thread's about foitin' !
Can outsiders come and make money fighting over there ? I need to make some quick cash to pay for a new fence.

[judoka_uk]

If I want to get really good at judo, do I also have to give up books about everything else? Because I respect you but this post is fucking retarded.

It's got that Limbaugh quality of being such a cardhouse of fail, of requiring the begging of so many questions as it is promulgated that it becomes unfeasible to deconstruct in a reasonable amount of time...I don't even know what to say except if you ever run low on ammo, you could probably salvage the pipes in your house for bullet cores if this is actually how you think.

An inability to disagree with my politics whilst still having a modicum of respect for my knowledge or ability as a Judoka speaks more about you than it does about me.

As for Limbaughean levels of hyperbole, the post of yours I replied to asserted that my grandchildren "will barely be human as you use the word". When it comes to bizarre, alarmist and absurd statements I think the notion that my own grandchildren would be unrecognisable to me as human beings makes things that clown Limbaugh say seem comparatively sane.

OK, alternative attempt at coherent response: Free market capitalism was a terribly controversial idea at one point. Pure free market systems lead to terrible strikes and riots and nine fingered 12 year old coal miners and debtor's prisons and grotesque environmental fuckups, things like that. You do know that, right?

You're also essentially doing the classic old white man dance of using socialism, social democracy, communism, facisim, etc interchangeably, based mostly on what tyrannical governments of the past CALLED themselves.

The argument about 'true capitalism' as you want to define it, is the same about 'true socialism'. If I point to Stalin's Russia or Mao's China and died in the wool Commie will splutter back that that wasn't real socialism, because of X, Y and Z. In the same way if you pick a random point in the past and claim that was 'true capitalism' a died in the wool anarcho capitalist will splutter back that it wasn't real capitalism, because of X, Y and Z.

You want to define 'free market capitalism' by the negatives you perceive to be a result of capitalism. For you capitalism is children in sweatshops, robber barons and Tiny Tim. Its a bizarre, childish caricature.

Watch, I can do that too - "The L in PLO stands for "Liberation" you know. Same root word as Liberty! So next time you stand up for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you're supporting terror! North korea BEST KOREA!1"

You see, this is what you're doing, but with capitalism. You're doing the same fucktarded thing Limbaugh does. You pick out everything you think is bad about capitalism and then proscribe those characteristics to an iteration of capitalism.

I was messing about when I asked you how social democracy was working out in North Korea. Clearly that didn't come across. However, you did your own Limbaugh by picking up my free market-capitalist baton, running to your own blackboard, drawing curvy lines all the way to the work house and then stomped your foot.



My point is this, and you can feel free to go and Limbaugh this again by claiming I want 4 year olds to work in factories 24 hours a day if you like.

Economic freedom is intrinsically tied to personal freedom. Economic freedom is what creates wealth. As economic freedom has been advanced we have all become richer. In 1930 telephones, cars and televisions were the preserve of millionaires. In 2012 even the poorest in society have a mobile telephone, a colour television and access to a car.

Free markets and capitalism create immensely wealthy people, but unless corrupted by governmental interference leading to corporatism. It raises the wealth of all in society, your average Briton and American is infinitely richer than your average Briton or American 50 or 100 years ago.

[Vince Tortelli]

Hell, why not just go back to the Roman system of every rich man having his own army, conquering what the **** ever they want with impunity. I suppose that sounds wonderful to you.

It did work out beautifully for the Romans, it wasn't until they started using a government funded Army that the Pax Romana fell apart. Probably was not so good for the Jews, Franks, and Spaniards, but hey, they chose to flagrantly and provocatively live right next door to Rome. Actions like that have inevitable consequences.

Sure, every powerful man having his own loyal legion led to the unpleasantness between Caesar, Pompey, Anthony, and Caesar Jr., but there's a reason the time period after Rome fell was called "The Dark Ages".

[JohnnyCache]

The difference between Stalin's Russia and the robber baron era is that Stalin's russia was actually an impure example of communism, while the robber-baron era was very pure strain capitalism.

The notion that any -ism is a perfect solution to every problem is simplistic, as is the notion that economic freedom builds wealth.

By your logic, the entire united states should have been millionaires by 1920, but unbridled capitalism ate itself.

It's more correct to say it's an environmental factor that can feed wealth.

Sunlight feeds plants, so why isn't the gobi a jungle?

[JohnnyCache]

Of what use is definition of a thing that ignores its negatives? Sweatshops, child labor company stores, etc, those things really did happen and really were produced by unregulated markets.

It's not a case of opponents defining by flaws, it's a case of proponents ignoring them.

[Vince Tortelli]

As I see it, where Communism keeps going wrong is that the state has to become really powerful in order to end the exploitation of the working class by the non producing rich. After it has seized all this power and ended said exploitation, it then withers away and we all live in True Communism, with all the attendant unicorns, rainbows, and good will to our fellow man.

Problem is, every state that has so empowered itself has refused to wither away, with most of the leadership so adamant on NOT withering away that they have to be dragged out of their seats of power at gunpoint and hung in the streets to get the reins of power out of their grasp. (Romania, Cuba, etc.)

[mike321]

The difference between Stalin's Russia and the robber baron era is that Stalin's russia was actually an impure example of communism, while the robber-baron era was very pure strain capitalism.

The notion that any -ism is a perfect solution to every problem is simplistic, as is the notion that economic freedom builds wealth.

. Communism does NOT work in theory, that's the problem. You can regulate capitalism and avoid problems. Communism does not work. The reason you never saw a successful communist state is that the theory is wrong. Even in the evil communist states, I find it hard to believe no one tried to make a go of it using communist ideas. They failed because of a lack of wealth generating mechanisms. There was nothing to reform. Unless you would have us believe the soviets and their ilk were perfect at sabatoging the true communism with the proper lineage from ip man... oops what were we talking about?