Lefties Duped By "Why Socialism Works" Guide On Amazon

by Guest Tue Jun 27, 2017 12:19 pm

Spare a thought for any socialists searching on Amazon for their summer reading. On the face of it, ‘Why Socialism Works‘ by Harrison Lievesley seems a sensible purchase for wannabe Jez fans. Most reviews are very positive, indeed the vast majority give five-star ratings. One calls it “a proper left wing economic primer”, another says “Absolutely gripping, I couldn’t put it down”.

Lefties Duped By "Why Socialism Works" Guide On Amazon Reviews

Enough to convince budding lefties to order the £7.99 paperback. Cue disappointment when, upon taking delivery of ‘Why Socialism Works’, readers found every one of its 169 pages reads: “It doesn’t”.

Lefties Duped By "Why Socialism Works" Guide On Amazon It-doesnt

Jane Collins was not impressed:

Lefties Duped By "Why Socialism Works" Guide On Amazon Jane

Truth hurts…

https://order-order.com/2017/06/27/lefties-duped-by-why-socialism-works-guide-on-amazon/

by Andy Tue Jun 27, 2017 12:47 pm

More lefty bashing again Thor.
Any claim to your hatred of both left and right dissapeared a long time ago.
Your claim to political neutrality is just a piss take. Why dont you just admit you are a Tory. I know it is a tougher call than telling your family you are gay, HIV or are emigrating, but for once, just be honest.
If you are as neutral as you claim, WHERE ARE the equal number of anti right threads?

by Guest Tue Jun 27, 2017 12:58 pm

Angry Andy wrote:More lefty bashing again Thor.
Any claim to your hatred of both left and right dissapeared a long time ago.
Your claim to political neutrality is just a piss take. Why dont you just admit you are a Tory. I know it is a tougher call than telling your family you are gay, HIV or are emigrating, but for once, just be honest.
If you are as neutral as you claim, WHERE ARE the equal number of anti right threads?

And Andy shows why he has a sense of humour failure

Anyway, how is something factual, left bashing? When socialism never works?

This shows that many lefties were duped and I have never claimed to be politically neutral

Maybe you can show where I have?

All I stated is that I no longer support the Tories, which is true, I no long do but still see the left under Corbyn as the biggest threat to this country.

What is even funnier is how you get so angry over something brilliantly funny

Laughing

by Andy Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:01 pm

It was as funny as dysentry.

by Guest Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:03 pm

Angry Andy wrote:It was as funny as dysentry.

Like I said, a complete lack of sense of humour, due to some clueless lefties

Laughing

by Original Quill Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:08 pm

Socialism is just the next step after laissez-faire liberalism. It incorporates the whole tradition, and improves on the former shortcomings.

A great, but easy read is, George Lichtheim, A Short History of Socialism (1970). As one commentator says:

The first two thirds of the book are excellent. Lichthein presents an engaging history of the pre-Marxist genesis of cooperativist ideas following the French Revolution. His subtle, yet both cutting and loving critiques of the schools of the early-left are marvelously entertaining, informative, and dry.

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:22 pm

Angry Andy wrote:It was as funny as dysentry.

You mean "dysentry" as in Andy-speak?

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:23 pm

Angry Andy wrote:More lefty bashing again Thor.
Any claim to your hatred of both left and right dissapeared a long time ago.
Your claim to political neutrality is just a piss take. Why dont you just admit you are a Tory. I know it is a tougher call than telling your family you are gay, HIV or are emigrating, but for once, just be honest.
If you are as neutral as you claim, WHERE ARE the equal number of anti right threads?

May we please see your equal number of anti Left threads?

by Andy Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:58 pm

I dont claim to dislike both sides. Unlike Didge, I lay my hat to the left, whereas he lies when he says he is politically neutral, a position easily dismantled by the evidence that he rarely ,if ever, posts anything anti-conservativebut spams endlessly about lefties and Corbyn.
His latest jape is to say he has never claimed to be neutral.

by Guest Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:15 am

Angry Andy wrote:I dont claim to dislike both sides. Unlike Didge, I lay my hat to the left, whereas he lies when he says he is politically neutral, a position easily dismantled by the evidence that he rarely ,if ever, posts anything anti-conservativebut spams endlessly about lefties and Corbyn.
His latest jape is to say he has never claimed to be neutral.

It seems you are the one lying again and obsessed with posters

Show me anywhere that I have stated I am politically neutral?

I never have stated any such thing, but this is what regressive's do when they cannot counter views made, they instead invent lies to try and deligitimize people.

Here watch Labour supporters tell you of the problem of antisemitism in the Labour Party

by 'Wolfie Wed Jun 28, 2017 5:43 am

Thorin wrote:
Angry Andy wrote:More lefty bashing again Thor.
Any claim to your hatred of both left and right dissapeared a long time ago.
Your claim to political neutrality is just a piss take. Why dont you just admit you are a Tory. I know it is a tougher call than telling your family you are gay, HIV or are emigrating, but for once, just be honest.
If you are as neutral as you claim, WHERE ARE the equal number of anti right threads?

And Andy shows why he has a sense of humour failure

Anyway, how is something factual, left bashing? When socialism never works?

This shows that many lefties were duped and I have never claimed to be politically neutral

Maybe you can show where I have?

All I stated is that I no longer support the Tories, which is true, I no long do but still see the left under Corbyn as the biggest threat to this country.

What is even funnier is how you get so angry over something brilliantly funny

Complete and utter bullshit on your part, Dodge...

All that you keep on proving by repeating your endless spamming drivel against "socialism", is that you actually know less-than-zero about actual economic systems; as do those braindead and clueless corparitist shills that you keep on quoting...

Your banal attacks don't even attempt to distinguish between the different types of socialism, but just keep on pushing tne same idiotic themes, to wit :

greed is good -- socialism is bad
Socialism never works -- capitalism always works
All socialists are "commies"
Corporations are your friends -- everyone else is a communist
All right wingers are good --- all lefties are "regressives"

Pretty pathetc effort there, Doddery one..
You keep on championing capitalism, as if it was going to solve the worlds problems, whereas most of the current "big" problems -- deforestation, pollution, overpopulation, inequalities, wars -- are down to human greed and criminal corporations..

Still waiting for you to show us even one example of a successful capitalist country -- one where that capitalism has solved the ingrained capitalist problems of exploitation, poverty, pollution ???

by Guest Wed Jun 28, 2017 6:02 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Complete and utter bullshit on your part, Dodge...
Thorin wrote: Really because some regressive says so?

All that you keep on proving by repeating your endless spamming drivel against "socialism", is that you actually know less-than-zero about actual economic systems; as do those braindead and clueless corparitist shills that you keep on quoting...
Thorin wrote:Nothing to show whether socialism has worked or not.
It never has worked it is a flawed failed system

Your banal attacks don't even attempt to distinguish between the different types of socialism, but just keep on pushing tne same idiotic themes, to wit :
Thorin wrote: More tantrums and nothing on the points at had

greed is good -- socialism is bad
Thorin wrote:
Greed is bad, socialism in history has been a disaster

Socialism never works -- capitalism always works

Thorin wrote:Socialism has never worked, where Capitalism has worked but has its flaws

All socialists are "commies"
Corporations are your friends -- everyone else is a communist

Thorin wrote:lol had to laught at that gibberish and to you everyone right of Stalin is a Nazi

All right wingers are good --- all lefties are "regressives"
Thorin wrote:Some lefties are very good, some are regressives, you included

Pretty pathetc effort there, Doddery one..
Thorin wrote:So you basically like Andy Pandy invented a load of lies I never stated and do exactly the same and try to deligitimize the poster. Not able to tackle the points and prove you also have a sense of humour failure
You keep on championing capitalism, as if it was going to solve the worlds problems, whereas most of the current "big" problems -- deforestation, pollution, overpopulation, inequalities, wars -- are down to human greed and criminal corporations..
Thorin wrote:More lies lol

Still waiting for you to show us even one example of a successful capitalist country -- one where that capitalism has solved the ingrained capitalist problems of exploitation, poverty, pollution ???

America
Japan
India
That is just within today, there have been many examples in history

Now are you going to debate or continue to have one of your hissy fits

by veya_victaous Thu Jun 29, 2017 7:10 am

LOL none of them are as successful as China Laughing

Capitalism is a failure. If you don't think so, Justify why Kim and Kanye earn more than Cancer researchers, lead surgeons or even police officers...

If you cant than you have to admit capitalism fails to distribute wealth in any way that assists a productive society

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 29, 2017 7:17 am

I thought this was a joke at first, but it really is on Amazon. To be fair, it does say this:

This is a comprehensive book on how and why socialism will work, despite your friends saying it has and always will be a failure. Please note this book only contains two words and is entirely satire.

Are the reviews fake? That's not good.

by Guest Thu Jun 29, 2017 7:29 am

veya_victaous wrote:LOL none of them are as successful as China

Capitalism is a failure. If you don't think so, Justify why Kim and Kanye earn more than Cancer researchers, lead surgeons or even police officers...

If you cant than you have to admit capitalism fails to distribute wealth in any way that assists a productive society

And yet China is successful as its embraced capitalism

Lol

by 'Wolfie Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:02 am

America -- around 20% don't have adequate health cover -- soon to exceed 30% under "Trumpcare"; around 15% living in poverty; home ownership is falling..

Japan -- still has a Royal family; population has been shrinking over the past 70 years; Lower 'home ownership' rates than many other industrialised/First World places..

India -- still has a majority of its population living in poverty; still has its "caste" system; still has high rates of sexism and racism..

by Guest Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:05 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

America -- around 20% don't have adequate health cover -- soon to exceed 30% under "Trumpcare"; around 15% living in poverty; home ownership is falling..

Japan -- still has a Royal family; population has been shrinking over the past 70 years; Lower 'home ownership' rates than many other industrialised/First World places..

India -- still has a majority of its population living in poverty; still has its "caste" system; still has high rates of sexism and racism..

lol laughed at the above, as all 3 are still successful capitalist countries.

Just because they have some failings does not mean they are unsuccessful

Never seen such a dumb based argument

by 'Wolfie Fri Jun 30, 2017 4:49 am

So, Dodger...

A "successful" capitalist society to you is one where less than1% of people own over 70% of the wealth ? One's with the greatest disparities in household incomes ? Those that value fame and celebrity above actual productive employment and gainful contributions...

Where large proportions have no gainful employment, no homes, no medical care ?

And all three of those countries have significant environmental problems, as well..

None of the three countries you champion even have decent welfare systems..

Seems to me that your priorities are the "dumb arsed" arguments here, Doddery one...

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 4:53 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

So, Dodger...

A "successful" capitalist society to you is one where less than1% of people own over 70% of the wealth ? One's with the greatest disparities in household incomes ? Those that value fame and celebrity above actual productive employment and gainful contributions...

Where large proportions have no gainful employment, no homes, no medical care ?

And all three of those countries have significant environmental problems, as well..

None of the three countries you champion even have decent welfare systems..

Seems to me that your priorities are the "dumb arsed" arguments here, Doddery one...

So you are saying that where people are successful is wrong?

That they have no right to work hard and build up successful companies?

Seems to me you are presenting a very bitter argument.

As what is stopping you from doing the same?

The answer?

Nothing.

If you are saying people in western capitalist countries who have the same chances in education and then don't use this as they should, the failings is on the individuals.

I have no issue with people being successful, so why are you?

What you ail to grasp is they also pay the vast majority in taxes

Laters

by 'Wolfie Fri Jun 30, 2017 5:01 am

Bullshit, Dodge...

Corporations and millionaires actually only pay 30- odd % of the total taxation in Britain and Australia...

Even less in the USA..

One of the underlying causes of so much poverty, environmental damage, inequality and wars comes from the unfettered human greed that underpins westernised "laissez faire" pure capitalism systems..

Championing personal achievements at the costs of so much outright damage to this planet, so many wrecked lives, and so many fractured societies, is a truly greedy, unconscientious and mercenary way of approaching these problems.

by Eilzel Fri Jun 30, 2017 5:04 am

Seriously didge?

Japan is a great country, fully agree. They also have a higher suicide rate than a lot of places in the world so all is not that well for working people there. You'd be amazed how many Japanese people come to stay in Thailand because the stress levels are so much lower. Not that Thailand is any kind of example either. Also a capitalist country with massive exploitation, but for people coming from developed countries, Thailand can be an easy way to live well with less stress.

India is massively polluted and 2/3 of its people are the POOREST in the world. If that is 'success' then to hell with that kind of 'success'.

America. Well it is developed. And most people live well relative to much of the rest of the world. No arguments there. But how many developing countries are MASSIVELY exploited for resources and cheap manfacturing to ensure that Americans are able to continue living their comfortable life styles? (This goes for western Europe and other developed nations too tbf, we get cheap clothes and cheap food due to imports from dirt poor countries around the world).

This is NOT an admirable success at all. It isn't even success for most people in those countries. Or it comes at the expense of poor people throughout the world. We should aim for better.

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:13 am

Eilzel wrote:Seriously didge?

Japan is a great country, fully agree. They also have a higher suicide rate than a lot of places in the world so all is not that well for working people there. You'd be amazed how many Japanese people come to stay in Thailand because the stress levels are so much lower. Not that Thailand is any kind of example either. Also a capitalist country with massive exploitation, but for people coming from developed countries, Thailand can be an easy way to live well with less stress.
Thorin wrote:WTF, suicide rates has nothing to do with Capitalism, but a variety of reasons. The fact that Thailand is also a capitalist country shows that this is not the issue, but clearly something else. So that argument holds no water.

India is massively polluted and 2/3 of its people are the POOREST in the world. If that is 'success' then to hell with that kind of 'success'.
Thorin wrote:Poor argument again
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/opinion/paris-agreement-climate-china-india.html

America. Well it is developed. And most people live well relative to much of the rest of the world. No arguments there. But how many developing countries are MASSIVELY exploited for resources and cheap manfacturing to ensure that Americans are able to continue living their comfortable life styles? (This goes for western Europe and other developed nations too tbf, we get cheap clothes and cheap food due to imports from dirt poor countries around the world).
Thorin wrote:Poor argument again, so now you are saying we should not buy clothes and thus see people in these poor countries further suffer? That has to be the worst argument you have made. What needs to happen is that the UN actually do what its meant to do and ensure better rights for workers in these countries. So the west is not exploiting anything. I mean are you seriously telling me you stop to think about every item of clothes you buy to its manufacture and if people have been exploited. Your argument does not look to the cause and course of the problem and if people stopped buying clothes from poorer countries, then even more of its citizens would suffer from lack of work

This is NOT an admirable success at all. It isn't even success for most people in those countries. Or it comes at the expense of poor people throughout the world. We should aim for better.

So again you are making poor arguments and I am not denying that we can make the world better, but suicide rates is not down to Capitalism. You post up issues that many countries have to tackle with. What this is about is whether capitalism has worked and does work.

The answer to that is yes

by veya_victaous Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:59 am

Thorin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:LOL none of them are as successful as China

Capitalism is a failure. If you don't think so, Justify why Kim and Kanye earn more than Cancer researchers, lead surgeons or even police officers...

If you cant than you have to admit capitalism fails to distribute wealth in any way that assists a productive society

And yet China is successful as its embraced capitalism

Lol

No It hasn't, like most nations outside the eurosphere in is it's own economic system that is neither capitalism nor communism but would fall under the broader definitions of socialism

China is lead by the state not by those that hold the capital so it cannot be capitalist,
unlike the USA where the state is lead by whomever holds the most capital

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:01 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Thorin wrote:

And yet China is successful as its embraced capitalism

Lol

No It hasn't, like most nations outside the eurosphere in is it's own economic system that is neither capitalism nor communism but would fall under the broader definitions of socialism

China is lead by the state not by those that hold the capital so it cannot be capitalist,
unlike the USA where the state is lead by whomever holds the most capital

It still has embraced capitalism through its business enterprises, no matter how you try to ignore the facts

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:02 am

How China went from communist to capitalist

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-china-went-from-communist-to-capitalist-2015-10?IR=T

by Eilzel Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:12 am

China is hardly a shining example of either ideology. It embraces the worst if both sides in manys. Oppresses its poorer population with cheap manufacturing while having an over bearing state that offers little individual freedom.

Didge, the suicides of Japan can be linked with overworked lifestyles (they even have a word for this in Japanese!).

What about 2/3 of India being the poorest in the world. Btw, 100 Indians hold 30% of that nations wealth. Pretty awful 'success' imo.

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:20 am

Eilzel wrote:China is hardly a shining example of either ideology. It embraces the worst if both sides in manys. Oppresses its poorer population with cheap manufacturing while having an over bearing state that offers little individual freedom.

Didge, the suicides of Japan can be linked with overworked lifestyles (they even have a word for this in Japanese!).

What about 2/3 of India being the poorest in the world. Btw, 100 Indians hold 30% of that nations wealth. Pretty awful 'success' imo.

Where did i express China was a good example Eilzel?

I never did, what I showed is that now China has embraced capitalism and due to this more citizens have a better lifestyle, though its still poor in relative terms.

Suicide can be linked to many reasons and you will even find that men are more susceptible to suicide than women. The point is being overworked, is based on an ethic that Japan has around again rote learning. capitalism is not the cause of this, but the culture itself

Why do people thinks its awful for people to be successful? Its nothing more than a resentful argument

Again they worked there way up, so what is stopping others?
Again I never said India was perfect, but it is one of the fastest growing economies and they are making leaps and bounds in sorting out their own problems

by veya_victaous Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:21 am

The socialist market economy is the economic model employed by the People's Republic of China. It is based on the dominance of the state-owned sector and an open-market economy, and has its origins in the Chinese economic reforms introduced under Deng Xiaoping.

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:22 am

veya_victaous wrote:
The socialist market economy is the economic model employed by the People's Republic of China. It is based on the dominance of the state-owned sector and an open-market economy, and has its origins in the Chinese economic reforms introduced under Deng Xiaoping.

Still has embraced Captalism

How China went from communist to capitalist

Due to the reforms Deng put in place, China has gone from being a country that opposed capitalism to one that embraces property rights, profits and free market competition.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-china-went-from-communist-to-capitalist-2015-10?IR=T

by veya_victaous Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:31 am

LOL thorin thinks it is a discussion just between him.

@elizel
While China may not be perfect the reality is that it has risen 300million people out of poverty in 50 years more than any other nation of economy in history.
True now there is an upper class that wants to slow down the speed of wealth sharing but that is not up to them since China remains politically communist, which is why we see in the western world so many Chinese investors 'offshoring' wealth since there is the belief that the Chinese government will step in at some point and kick start the wealth sharing agenda again.

China is a new economic and political dynamic its own economists point out that unlike western democracy/capitalism
China is lead by the state not by those that hold the capital so it cannot be capitalist,
unlike the USA where the state is lead by whomever holds the most capital
and it is fairy true in other western nations too that Capital leads the political prerogative while in china it is the other way round

another interesting observation is that
in the west you can change the parties but not the policies
in china you can change the policies but the not the party

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:34 am

lol veya seems to think people engaging me in debate is now wrong and that it should be open to everyone. After previously inventing some made up rule to stifle my ability to speak my views, by banning me where i also joined in debates between posters. That is seen wrong when I do, but now its okay when he and others do

lol!

You cannot make it up how some people contradict themselves

I am happy for everyone to engage my points and others over their own veya

by veya_victaous Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:37 am

@thorin
You now how I keep saying you believe the one-sided propaganda without any real insight into the finer points of the 2 sided dynamics of a situation

Posting a American capitalist article telling us that China is Capitalist which is contradictory to what Chinese government and Chinese economist say is a Grade A example of that Wink

@Thorin's Narcissism

Where did i express China was a good example Eilzel?

Elizel was obviously responding to ME with his comments about China as I WAS saying it was good.. maybe if you read other peoples posts you could follow a debate without just inferring that everything is revolving around you Rolling Eyes

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:43 am

veya_victaous wrote:@thorin
You now how I keep saying you believe the one-sided propaganda without any real insight into the finer points of the 2 sided dynamics of a situation

Posting a American capitalist article telling us that China is Capitalist which is contradictory to what Chinese government and Chinese economist say is a Grade A example of that

@Thorin's Narcissism

Where did i express China was a good example Eilzel?

Elizel was obviously responding to ME with his comments about China as I WAS saying it was good.. maybe if you read other peoples posts you could follow a debate without just inferring that everything is revolving around you

So yet more personal attacks and nothing to counter my points

Hilarious

This is all; regressives do.

Try to deligitmize

I simple laugh everytime you do Veya

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:46 am

Eilzel wrote:China is hardly a shining example of either ideology. It embraces the worst if both sides in manys. Oppresses its poorer population with cheap manufacturing while having an over bearing state that offers little individual freedom.

Didge, the suicides of Japan can be linked with overworked lifestyles (they even have a word for this in Japanese!).

What about 2/3 of India being the poorest in the world. Btw, 100 Indians hold 30% of that nations wealth. Pretty awful 'success' imo.

Apparently the above reply from Eilzel to me, is actually a reply to veya, according to Veya

Lefties Duped By "Why Socialism Works" Guide On Amazon 3489511464

Lefties Duped By "Why Socialism Works" Guide On Amazon 3489511464

by Eilzel Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:59 am

veya_victaous wrote:LOL thorin thinks it is a discussion just between him.

@elizel
While China may not be perfect the reality is that it has risen 300million people out of poverty in 50 years more than any other nation of economy in history.
True now there is an upper class that wants to slow down the speed of wealth sharing but that is not up to them since China remains politically communist, which is why we see in the western world so many Chinese investors 'offshoring' wealth since there is the belief that the Chinese government will step in at some point and kick start the wealth sharing agenda again.

China is a new economic and political dynamic its own economists point out that unlike western democracy/capitalism
China is lead by the state not by those that hold the capital so it cannot be capitalist,
unlike the USA where the state is lead by whomever holds the most capital
and it is fairy true in other western nations too that Capital leads the political prerogative while in china it is the other way round

another interesting observation is that
in the west you can change the parties but not the policies
in china you can change the policies but the not the party

China is communist in name only. The only thing it has in common with the CCCP of Mao Xedong is that the Communist Party has complete control and person freedoms are extremely limited.

China is led by an extremely authoritarian and corrupt state. Many in China would love to live elsewhere (and do often migrate elsewhere), you do not see the same from west to east.

And while it is great that China has lifted 300 million out of poverty, it is important to point out that that is a fraction of a population of around 1.6 billion. Hundreds of millions more remain impoverished.

China is hardly a nation of equal opportunities either. Women are NOT equal to men. Gay people are discriminated against. Minorities from Xijiang and Tibet are oppressed and exist in what amount to colonies of a Chinese Empire. There is zero free speech and absolutely no criticism of the state allowed. The media is controlled by the party. Hong Kong, hoping to be left alone following the handover in 1997, is set to be taken increasingly further under the control of the 'Communist' party. Meanwhile, big business exploits the poor just like in every other developing nation.

China is not communist, it is capitalism in Chinese colours.

by Eilzel Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:01 am

And oh my dear, the China comment was to both of you, the rest to didge. Hence the second part being addressed as such.

Btw didge- the caste system might be problem for social mobility in India hmm?

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:18 am

Eilzel wrote:And oh my dear, the China comment was to both of you, the rest to didge. Hence the second part being addressed as such.

Btw didge- the caste system might be problem for social mobility in India hmm?

Oh my dear?

What a suck up ha ha

So instead of addressing each of as, our views differ, you made the point to both of us, which I already agree on that view?

Really?

lol, behave and stop pandering to the an unhinged loon

The caste system? Wow you give up easy on progression don't you.
How do you think we progressed from our caste system in the 19th century? With pessimists like yourself Eilzel?

by Eilzel Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:54 am

Oh my dear as in 'oh my god' didge, jeez...

Rest is a waste of time. If you want to pretend India is an example of the wonderful success of capitalism then go ahead, I'll stick with reality.

It is LW policies like free healthcare, free education and the welfare state that have put Britain and other nations ahead of others.

by Guest Fri Jun 30, 2017 12:01 pm

Eilzel wrote:Oh my dear as in 'oh my god' didge, jeez...

Rest is a waste of time. If you want to pretend India is an example of the wonderful success of capitalism then go ahead, I'll stick with reality.

It is LW policies like free healthcare, free education and the welfare state that have put Britain and other nations ahead of others.

Well it would help if you presented a comprehensive argument.
I mean India had a caste problem before Capitalism, so its hardly down to capitalism is it?
I mean it would be the same under socialism, or did this not register when making this point?

These LF policies for free healthcare. free education etc,. would not be possible without capitalism

by veya_victaous Sun Jul 02, 2017 7:08 am

Thorin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:@thorin
You now how I keep saying you believe the one-sided propaganda without any real insight into the finer points of the 2 sided dynamics of a situation

Posting a American capitalist article telling us that China is Capitalist which is contradictory to what Chinese government and Chinese economist say is a Grade A example of that

@Thorin's Narcissism

Where did i express China was a good example Eilzel?

Elizel was obviously responding to ME with his comments about China as I WAS saying it was good.. maybe if you read other peoples posts you could follow a debate without just inferring that everything is revolving around you

So yet more personal attacks and nothing to counter my points

Hilarious

This is all; regressives do.

Try to deligitmize

I simple laugh everytime you do Veya

I answered all your points and you ARE illegitimate

Now Why Dont you address some of the points you have been dodging put forward by wolf and my self
Is having Children starve, no universal health care and the associated preventable deaths Successful? is success having billionaires and those in abject poverty success?

How can you claim Capitalism is successful? what part of laissez faire is even implemented in it's true brutal form? For an idea that is 'successful' it seems to have never been implemented because of the obvious detrimental impact on an society that would allow the few to be so greedy?

by Guest Sun Jul 02, 2017 9:58 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Thorin wrote:

So yet more personal attacks and nothing to counter my points

Hilarious

This is all; regressives do.

Try to deligitmize

I simple laugh everytime you do Veya

I answered all your points and you ARE illegitimate

Now Why Dont you address some of the points you have been dodging put forward by wolf and my self
Is having Children starve, no universal health care and the associated preventable deaths Successful? is success having billionaires and those in abject poverty success?

How can you claim Capitalism is successful? what part of laissez faire is even implemented in it's true brutal form? For an idea that is 'successful' it seems to have never been implemented because of the obvious detrimental impact on an society that would allow the few to be so greedy?

Which points?

Again this is about whether a country has a successful economy based off capitalism

All the example sow that they do.

What you want to go in to is other policies, which have nothing to do with capitalism

As for example in the UK we have a free health service

by veya_victaous Mon Jul 03, 2017 6:35 am

So you say having starving children and people die from treatable dieses is 'success' if the rich are rich enough and allowed to make more money

Cool, Just don't pretend you give a shit about people.

And NHS has everything to do with SOCIALISM which is what the OP says doesn't work.
you lose, you're not even on topic

by Guest Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:51 am

veya_victaous wrote:So you say having starving children and people die from treatable dieses is 'success' if the rich are rich enough and allowed to make more money

Cool, Just don't pretend you give a shit about people.

And NHS has everything to do with SOCIALISM which is what the OP says doesn't work.
you lose, you're not even on topic

The NHS would not work without capitalism.
The rich already vastly pay more in taxes than anyone else.
The NHS would not be free without their input
People starving is not the fault of the rich in this country

by Original Quill Mon Jul 03, 2017 7:08 pm

Thorin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:So you say having starving children and people die from treatable dieses is 'success' if the rich are rich enough and allowed to make more money

Cool, Just don't pretend you give a shit about people.

And NHS has everything to do with SOCIALISM which is what the OP says doesn't work.
you lose, you're not even on topic

The NHS would not work without capitalism.
The rich already vastly pay more in taxes than anyone else.
The NHS would not be free without their input

The rich also make a lot more in a capitalistic system. It's not their economy to use as they please. Society puts conditions on "their money", among them taxes.

Thorin wrote:People starving is not the fault of the rich in this country

A point we are constantly reminded of...but it is a fact, the rich hate people.

by Guest Mon Jul 03, 2017 7:18 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Thorin wrote:

The NHS would not work without capitalism.
The rich already vastly pay more in taxes than anyone else.
The NHS would not be free without their input

The rich also make a lot more in a capitalistic system. It's not their economy to use as they please. Society puts conditions on "their money", among them taxes.

Thorin wrote:People starving is not the fault of the rich in this country

A point we are constantly reminded of...but it is a fact, the rich hate people.

If that was the case, then why do many rich people give their money to charity?
Your perception of rich people is based on emotions and not reason.
Nobody says its their economy to use, and yet they pay far more into this in order that people can have a free health care, the point you glaringly miss.

by 'Wolfie Tue Jul 04, 2017 3:45 am

Thorin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

The rich also make a lot more in a capitalistic system. It's not their economy to use as they please. Society puts conditions on "their money", among them taxes.

A point we are constantly reminded of...but it is a fact, the rich hate people.

If that was the case, then why do many rich people give their money to charity?
Your perception of rich people is based on emotions and not reason.
Nobody says its their economy to use, and yet they pay far more into this in order that people can have a free health care, the point you glaringly miss.

WHY do you keep on pushing the lie that rich people pay the majority of taxation, when the truth is plainly clear by looking at the real world figures...

In no Western economy will you find wealthy individuals, nor any big business, paying even their fair share of taxes, let alone any kind of majority..

The largest taxation sources come from payroll taxes, and "indirect" taxes such as sales taxes and levies, and value added/goods and services taxes.

And the British, American and Australian gov'ts are all currently in the process of reducing corporate and millionaires tax rates even further..

by Guest Tue Jul 04, 2017 3:59 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
Thorin wrote:

If that was the case, then why do many rich people give their money to charity?
Your perception of rich people is based on emotions and not reason.
Nobody says its their economy to use, and yet they pay far more into this in order that people can have a free health care, the point you glaringly miss.

WHY do you keep on pushing the lie that rich people pay the majority of taxation, when the truth is plainly clear by looking at the real world figures...

In no Western economy will you find wealthy individuals, nor any big business, paying even their fair share of taxes, let alone any kind of majority..

The largest taxation sources come from payroll taxes, and "indirect" taxes such as sales taxes and levies, and value added/goods and services taxes.

And the British, American and Australian gov'ts are all currently in the process of reducing corporate and millionaires tax rates even further..

They do as a percentage pay the majority of taxation

You then claim and make claims yourself without any evidence

in this country the 1%, pay nearly 30% of taxes

That is quite a lot

by The Devil, You Know Tue Jul 04, 2017 3:13 pm

well I though the book was funny and accurate.

On the topic of socialism, does no one ask why so many socialist country's build walls to keep the people in, rather than keep people out.

by The Devil, You Know Tue Jul 04, 2017 3:38 pm

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
Thorin wrote:

If that was the case, then why do many rich people give their money to charity?
Your perception of rich people is based on emotions and not reason.
Nobody says its their economy to use, and yet they pay far more into this in order that people can have a free health care, the point you glaringly miss.

WHY do you keep on pushing the lie that rich people pay the majority of taxation, when the truth is plainly clear by looking at the real world figures...

In no Western economy will you find wealthy individuals, nor any big business, paying even their fair share of taxes, let alone any kind of majority..

The largest taxation sources come from payroll taxes, and "indirect" taxes such as sales taxes and levies, and value added/goods and services taxes.

And the British, American and Australian gov'ts are all currently in the process of reducing corporate and millionaires tax rates even further..

can you tell me what is fair about one group paying a bigger percentage of their income in tax, than another.

the top 3000 income tax payers in the UK pay the same amount of tax as the bottom 9million.

by Tommy Monk Tue Jul 04, 2017 8:50 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Thorin wrote:

And yet China is successful as its embraced capitalism

Lol

No It hasn't, like most nations outside the eurosphere in is it's own economic system that is neither capitalism nor communism but would fall under the broader definitions of socialism

China is lead by the state not by those that hold the capital so it cannot be capitalist,
unlike the USA where the state is lead by whomever holds the most capital

Sounds very much like you are describing the 'third way' system of nazism/fascism...!?

Laughing

by Sponsored content