So you clearly feel as though you are entitled to a good life at the expense of others It's not the job of your bankers, or employers to make your way through life. That is your responsibility no one is forced to default on their mortgage. They may have to change their lifestyle or work harder than they want but ultimately it will be their choice to do what it takes to keep their home or to just keep doing what they are doing and fail. This the kind of mindset that instills the parasitic behavior of socialists
First Hitler gassing Jews is a completely different topic and one that you may find very unexpectedly disturbing if you researched it to it's fullest extent. hint (more fiction than truth)
The modern education system and society have convince you in a socialist manner that you need to be in debt, False, I have been in debt for 15 years of my 54 when I bought my home. It is the only loan I have ever needed. It was my choice to go into debt and I paid it off responsibly. All of my other needs I worked for and lived within a budget as I do now.
Wrong, in capitalism you are not forced to purchase anything you don't wish to purchase. So if you go into debt by purchasing things on credit you should be responsible for paying it back and the people willing to lend you their wealth need some incentive to lend it to you interest is that incentive.
What makes you think socialism is not a form of slavery you are forced to pay for things which you may not use like health care and furthered education.
Socialism creates poverty, and a lack of incentive to be productive. This creates the drug abusers who are not productive in socialist economies there is no need for them to be productive. Drug dealers are exempt from the socialist economics as an illegal activity the government is not stealing their wealth. Dealing drugs is only a crime because the Government is heavily involved in big pharma where they make money from drugs and they don't want competition.
Can you give examples of places where this takes place? This is one of the difference between theoretical vs practical. In theory good when actually implemented doesn't work do to the nature of humans.
Again I say Capitalism is the lack of government involvement in business. You are clearly indicating what is true about the socialist part of our economic situation. As as in all socialist economies big business is entwined in government interchangeable you might say.
Capitalism is an economic system without government intervention Socialism is the control of business by government. So when you are discussing the "capitalist state" as you call it you are discussing the socialist end of our economic atmosphere. The further we go down the socialist rabbit hole the more of this you will see.
So in your world you would have theft as a legal practice? There would be no need to contribute to your own wealth you would just take it. What happens when all of the contributors exit the horrible world which you have created so that they could keep the wealth that they earned?
Socialism only works in small groups like a family where the supporting members voluntarily contribute to the group wealth. This is done because the supporting members feel an obligation to care for the non contributing members.
If socialism contributions are involuntary (this is theft) this creates an atmosphere of dissent. This is where socialism fails because the contributors and non-contributors are essentially equal. Why would you want to be a contributor?
In capitalism your worth is determined by your contribution and with ambition you can achieve any reasonable desired wealth. If you offer no contribution it is your choice but you should not expect others to support you.
When you have 1,000,000 dollars and you decide to lend it out to make money you can set your own rate on lending. You can lend it to the poor at 12% and hopefully it works out for you. My guess is that it won't. You will most likely lose on some of your investments. If you lend it to the wealthy they will either pay it back or you will take it using the law out of their wealth (which they have being wealthy) It's not a matter of fair it's just reality. The thing about reality and truth is that it's not always fair.
The USSR and now the Ukraine, and Russia are not capitalist economies and have the same drug problems. Capitalism is not the cause of drug abuse. I would argue that most drug addicted people are not the people who are ambitious and aspire to live a good life.
You mention war as being the product of capitalism but again war is the product of government. Socialist economies also welcome war more so than capitalist economies. War to government (socialist) accomplishes a number of important functions. Population decrease which = better economy. The need for materials of war = better economy. Unifies the statist nationalism and pride which = obedience. Capitalist societies can benefit from war but don't need it. Politicians who invest in war related industries like Dick Cheney and countless other politicians are the real problem
you should study more about political relationships with big business and banking. We are socialist enough now that the politicians are big business and politicians are the banking industry. The politicians are big oil and big Pharma. research it you will be amazed. That is the socialist end of things in the USA. In capitalism government is not suppose to control business the free market is. That is not what we have.
Again with prisons, capitalism is not the problem with the prison system it is government. The US government is the largest organized illegal drug syndicate in the world. This was confirmed with the 80's cocaine trade Barry Seals, the Iran Contra case, ect. Now it's the Opium trade (hence the reason we invaded Afghanistan) If you look at the UN poppy production stats you will see that in 2000-2001 the Taliban had burned the poppy fields and threatened the poppy farmers. The US military was sent in to protect the existing poppy fields and now poppy production is at an all time high. If you keep up on current events you would know there is a heroin epidemic. The US government also has a war on drugs so they can use the prison industrial complex to cash in on more money. For politicians it's a win win. Capitalism is not the problem there it's government.
I happen to know a great deal about healthcare as I work in healthcare. Here are some truths that you can fact check if you doubt my word. Health care is so costly because of government not capitalism. Healthcare is so over regulated that it cost a fortune to meet all of the government imposed criteria. An example of this is the fact that 20 years ago health insurance premiums were a small percentage of the current cost. Our hospital to meet all of the regulatory requirements employs about 800 people to take care of an average 30 patients daily. The government keeps requiring all kinds of positions where people are checking on the people who are checking on the other people. None of these people have anything to do with the health of the patient. They send inspection teams annually to find minor deficiencies then they fine the hospital for each of them. Better yet they are normally things which have been the same way for many years without issue and cost thousands to fix. Our most recent was the replacement of many fully functional doors at the cost of $180,000 plus 11,000 in fines. These are why health care is in the state it is in. Then the governments solution is not to have public owned hospitals and reduce regulation. The government answer is to make it more costly then steal more tax money to give to the insurance companies (Banking institutions) along with increasing the cost of health insurance for all.
First I clearly stated capitalism in the USA because Kenya and Bangladesh are not in the USA they are irrelevant to the discussion. I was born into poverty but you are wrong about ambition and learning not being a major factor in your outcome. They are what will determine your outcome in a capitalist society. My mom is proof of that, she had me at 16 years old. She was single with two children at 18 (poor choices) She dropped out of school and worked two min wage jobs to pay the bills. Once us children were out of the house she furthered her education went to work for a securities company and now has financial security a nice house in NY and one in Florida. (ambition was the determining factor)
Who do you think caused the economic collapse of 2008? It was government and it's rulers that is why the taxpayers gave them 800 billion dollars.
They are chosen outcomes. everyone has choices in life not all of our choices are good but they are ours. I come from poverty and I have chosen to live at a certain income level, stress level, location, in a certain type of relationship, ect. I could have chosen drugs, public assistance, homelessness, ect. People have to stop blaming everyone and everything else and be responsible for your own destiny.
So if you create something and are profiting off of your creation you are okay with politicians stealing the wealth you have earned as long as they give some back to the masses? It is not good enough that you created something which employs others giving them wealth because they have chosen to work for you? Are you a parasite that instead of creating and contributing to your own prosperity you need to steal it from others? If you choose to work for someone who is gaining something from your labors and that bothers you then why would you not just create wealth in a different way? You should be thankful for those who create jobs not to punish them by stealing their wealth.
So let's use transportation as an example of wealth. Some of us have low wealth transportation and have to fix it regularly to get back and forth to work,doctor, shopping, ect. Some have higher wealth transport which is new every couple of years. Others travel great distances on a regular basis requiring huge wealth for transport in socialism can everyone have a new car and fly around the world when ever they need. This socialism thing sounds great if that is the case I would love to travel the world with out a care knowing that socialism will take care of it.
That explains why socialism only works in fairy tales. Living in the human realm there is no way to make it work
So in your imaginary system what is the chain of custody for the wealth? You have my attention
As an atheist I think there would be nothing better than an in depth study of the Abrahamic religions from a historical and ideological stance. The more people who actually knew what the religious texts said the fewer religious people there would be. Just reading the Bible is normally cures christianity.
Your response makes no sense, with socialism or partial socialism like we have now. The government takes money from the citizens then uses that money in what ever manner they decide. This leads to corruption so politicians use their power and our money to conspire with wealthy bankers and business owner to control markets and prosper greatly. without the government interfering with business. The businesses remain competitive and innovation or ambition can bring great wealth. In socialist systems it's more about politics.
Did you read the article there are no common traits between Hitler and Trump this was an opinion of a competitive real estate developer how unbias, LOL Now let's talk facts, what presidential policies have caused a negative impact on Woman? Gays? Blacks? Liberals? The Poor? Legal Immigrants?, or Muslims? If your rant is valid you should be able to provide many statutes or you could be lying and find none.
This is a lie as over half of gun deaths are suicide which is a personal choice which the government has no right to condemn. Police use guns every day to benefit society. The reported number is about 50,000 times each year a firearm is used to prevent criminal activity. This is substantial enough that it imposes on our right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
So you are going to make the claim that if you are a victim of a violent crime you will not call the police (a person with a gun) to come save you?
The funny part of your claim here is that you have no idea why those people are in jail. Most people in jail are there for drug offenses and other non violent crimes not gun crimes.
So if armed intruders come to take your wealth and cause harm to you what is your plan? I will confidently state that you will seek out a person you can trust who is armed with a gun to save you.
What the hell chance do the untrained farmers , bankers and labourers of the U S have against the might of the American military who we keep getting told have no equal?
The military is not committed to attacking the USA public in a conflict against the government. Historically speaking a portion of the military would be willing to kill it's own citizens in favor of politicians but most will not.Historically speaking every government has become corrupt and was taken down by the citizens or a foreign entity, What makes you think that the same will not happen here in time?
So you are claiming that politicians aren't getting rich off of they healthcare system? If that is what you think you are very naive. That is why they passed the "Affordable Healthcare Act" If they wanted to help the public in an affordable way they would just open the hundreds of federally owned hospitals to people without insurance. They would pass laws limiting health care prices for any organization which takes federal funds.
Why is it wrong to be innovative or very ambitious and make lots of money? If someone comes up with a great idea why is it wrong for them to profit from it. Why is it wrong for a person to be ambitious and make lots of money. The people who offer the least to society are government who just steal the wealth of the citizens and spend it like drunken sailors.
The part of socialism that is most disgusting is government corruption. Historically this is why socialism always fails. When you redistribute the wealth as the redistributors you chose who the money goes to. If you think that would change if we move deeper into socialism you are naive. Bankers are the people who tell the politicians what they are going to do. They would also be the people redistributing the wealth. They will take their cut first. The banking crisis was caused by too many people making a pact with the Devil(banks). When I purchased my home I had a set interest rate and payment for a set amount of time and I paid it no matter what so that I didn't lose my home. I sometimes had to work multiple jobs which was tough as a single parent but it's what I felt I had to do. I have little sympathy for lazy people.
Why would anyone compare Trump to Hitler? Trump loves the Jews.
Many wealthy people are accused of things by people trying to get rich by using deceit. What's important in these matters are the provable facts. So let's look at the facts Trump has never been convicted of rape. Trump is less popular due to the fact that he is brutally honest about many things. Here's a fact politicians have made their living by lying, judging Trump differently than any other politician is just foolish. The question you should be asking is what presidential policies are affecting my life and is it for better or worse. None of the things you mention change anything in your life.
What is good about that? If we use "Medicare" as the example, why should that be a socialist program? We pay into it as an insurance program why not just make it an insurance program? Eliminate the government from it entirely.
What makes you think that fewer people benefit. In socialism only Government officials and the unproductive benefit.
With capitalism the productive and government officials benefit I would argue that we would be better as a society if the people who benefit are at least productive
Trump may be offensive but he has increased the amount my money I get to keep with his tax cut. The racial tensions from the Obama era have subsided. The country is safe from foreign invaders. Life is good under Trump
Obama tripled my insurance premiums and raised my copays some 5 times what they were. One of my coworkers died due to the Obama care rate hikes. He was having chest pains and our Emergency copay was $50 prior to Obama Care then went to $250 after. He was going to just call his doctors office on Mon but he died Sun because he didn't want to pay the $250.
Trump has done nothing which affects school shootings. There have been no repeals of gun regulation under Trump. and he has actually imposed new regulation and restriction on guns. Making the legal age 21 to purchase from federally licensed dealers outlawing bump stocks are a couple of examples
There is only one reason for the government to have single payer health care, because they are bought and paid for by Bankers (insurance companies) and big Pharma. It has nothing to do with helping people. If the government wanted to help the people with healthcare they would open up the federal run hospitals to the uninsured public which would cost a tiny fraction of single payer health care.
This is a lie that is why you have no supporting data to substantiate your claim. If a person is the victim of a violent crime why do they call for a person with a gun to come save them? It's because that is what saves most people from violent crimes. It is sad if you have seconds to react to prevent being a victim and the police are minutes away. It is very possible that you could lose your life, the life of a loved one, your property, your dignity.
It is clear that you have no idea why Guns are important to the peaceful members of society who want them to remain legal and available.
The main reason for the 2nd Amendment is politicians are historically corrupt, our forefathers understood this. Millions of people with guns are the only thing that keeps a government from totally oppressing it's citizens.
Another reason for unrestricted gun ownership for peaceful people is to keep the crime rate low. Criminals will always choose a soft target over a hard target, give them less soft targets.
Last is the freedom as a peaceful citizen to own what you desire since you have not harmed anyone
So is democratic socialism what we in the USA have now? We do have a mix of socialism and capitalism.
Do you know what kinds of programs they have for getting the people on public assistance off of public assistance? Rhetorical, the government gives them the wealth which they steal from producers and call it good.
I have lived in a poor rural community in NY for most of my life. I work at a hospital another basically socialist entity. Here is a truth about the socialist portion of my world. In my youth there were a few "welfare families" in my area. We termed them that because they lived off of the system (socialism) It was not that theses people couldn't work like everyone else it was to make their lives easier. Most of them had troubles with the law and drug abuse stemmed much of that. Now in the same area there are a higher number of people than ever before living off of the system with the same drug abuse problems. GIVING PEOPLE AN EASY WAY OUT OF LIFE'S RESPONSIBILITIES IS NOT HELPING THEM
Exactly what is democratic socialism? Maybe I'm looking at it wrong.
Good = having far more beneficial aspects than detrimental aspects
I think that if the government wants to give everyone health care then it should be just like the veterans at government run hospitals where any citizen may use them for free. They should be protected against mal practice suits to keep the costs down. For all of the people who pay for insurance they can go to the regular hospitals.
Believe it or not volunteer community supported fire depts have been successfully defending communities for years before government intervention and support. When the alarms went off nobody looked to see if you were a supporter or not they just did the best they could with what they had. There is nothing bad or wrong in that.
If you can offer nothing intelligent or a valid rebuttal why do you embarrass yourself by making idiotic comments. Do you realize that in life that makes you the loser? If you wanted to show signs of being a winner you would offer something good about socialism. So far if you notice no one has been able to do that. The supporters of socialism have only offer idiotic comments and envy.
You have described it beautifully. Socialism is where everyone strives to the lowest common denominator.
Why would anyone without a brain join a debate site? You have no intellect to debate. There are others like you why don't you join an ignorant argument site? That seems like it would be more to your ability.
The only good part of socialism comes when you have no wealth to give and no desire to create wealth then the working folks will make sure that you live just like they do except every day is a vacation day. I can't wait to be able to quit my job and live on socialism!!
To address your last comment Who would be in charge of the redistribution of the wealth? How would this be carried out? If for one second you think that politicians and bankers would not be involved you lying to yourself. These are the people who steal your money. the "capitalist businessman" just sets up a business and creates a profit by offering a service or producing a product. If they are successful they give jobs to many people and make a profit from their service or product. Bankers take the wealth of other people and turn that into wealth for themselves and if successful wealth for those who have invested in them. Politicians take wealth from people by force spend it like they stole it live in luxury and create more ways to steal the wealth of the people they rule over. So again I ask who will redistribute the wealth?
I would like to address the Banking issue there are banks in socialist societies and there are politicians in socialist societies Banks own the politicians and in a collective society who do you think control the monetary system? Politicians and bankers who currently are the biggest thieves in the world? Politicians and bankers. If we look historically at the failure of socialism in the world the cause of failure is always the corruption of the bankers and politicians. In the USA bankers and politicians are still the most corrupt section of society and they would be the ones implementing the socialist agenda.
So you seem to be discussing a theoretical unrealistic version of socialism that doesn't work for the same reasons.
In the real world most of the profit bearing entities are privately owned so either the collective would have to steal the company by force or the owner would have to sell it to the collective or more likely the owner would move the company to a capitalist society. Socialist societies are not known for their innovative ideas worldwide because as I have mentioned there is not incentive. If we look at reality we see the innovative people from socialist societies defecting to capitalist societies. Just something to think about how many Americans defect to socialist countries? How many people defect from socialist countries to the USA? It shouldn't be difficult to see which system is better.
You should research it, fun fact no organic matter has ever been located deeper than 1,000 feet below the surface of the earth. Oil is normally found from 3500 to 6000 feet below the surface.
It's interesting that very few people actually understand politics at all. Both sides want state control it's their Job. The ruling class (politicians) make their fortunes from "us" If they were to shrink government there would be less ruling class positions. Less control of the population. Politics is just like "Pro Wrestling" there is all of the drama and conflict in public then they pat each others' back and laugh as they fleece the American public
What evidence do you have to support that theory? Known fact is that oil is not from organic sources as they taught everyone in school. This means that oil is a product of geological processes. What evidence is there that oil isn't being formed every day.
So what incentive is there for companies to stay in the socialist societies if they can go to capitalist societies and make money? FYI Banks are run by the people who control the governments of the world so there is no economic system which they will not exploit. There are still people who will collect and redistribute the wealth these would be the bankers and politicians.Are you really trying to say they would give back what they have stolen? Reality check they will just like corporations take their portion and distribute what's left. There will be no difference they will be super wealthy from your labor.
So according to this business people have no good reason to build large businesses. since making a profit is evil. In your crazy world, employing people who are willing to work for a designated amount in order to make money is wrong? Does it become clear to you at this point that this is the reason businesses and the wealthy leave socialist countries? Then the government does what the employer did but with one difference you can never be the success story in a socialist world. It kills all innovation and creativity that could change the world. like Apple, and Microsoft, Facebook, ect. these were ideas of people who were creative to make it big and they changed the world. If they had developed these ideas in a socialist society they would have left to a better place where they could profit from their ideas. Socialism is not good
Social security is a socialist program and the government abuses it. If people put wealth away on their own example IRA without government it would be better for everyone but politicians.
Medicare is also heavily abused if the government wanted to do the right thing with healthcare they would open Government hospitals separate from the regular ones and those who didn't pay for insurance could go to them.
The fire dept is another thing which communities could ask the members of the community to support and it would be fine.
Socialist programs are not needed and no one should be required to give between 1/3 and 1/2 of their wealth to the ruling class so they can spend it like a bunch of drunken sailors.
I'm trying to understand what you mean by the profit of your labor is stolen by someone other than the government to make themselves rich. I see how the government is doing that to me right now. Currently if I do work I get about 2/3 of what I have earned and the government steals the other 1/3. What are you talking about?
In socialism the government takes the bulk of the money by threat of force (theft) I don't give the government 1/3 of my earnings because I know they will spend it better and more responsibly than I would, I give them 1/3 of my income because they take it from me by threat of force if anyone but the government does it it's called theft. The Government calls it taxation.
It's because all of these smart people were thinking on a personal very small scale. It's easy to say let's get rid of all of our weapons of war and have world peace (a statement of good intention) But in the real world which unfortunately is the one we ALL live in there are others who are narcissistic and have a lack of empathy. They will rule over (by force) the people who believe that these ideas are sustainable in the real world. In socialism the same thing always happens the ultra wealthy have the resources to exit the socialist economy. The ruling class lives in luxury off the backs of the working class. The uninspired class gets larger and larger as the reward for hard work is eliminated and finally just like Venezuela the population is starving.
The Serpent did nothing "Evil" as the Serpent just told Eve the truth. It was God that was trying to deceive Adam and Eve. God clearly lied to Adam when He says you will die the day you eat from that tree.They did not die that day just like the Serpent said.
God lied and then punished the Serpent for telling the truth
If God had put the serpent in the garden since all that was created came from God. All that God made was good therefore the serpent was also good.
That's Funny someone down voted the actual biblical passages as if they were somehow just negative opinion, LOL
Hebrews 1:5 says nothing relevant to God and Jesus being the same entity
Isaiah 9:6 has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus
Matt 1:23 clearly says who name is Immanuel (notice Jesus doesn't mean God with us)
John 1 discusses "the word" yet does not clearly reference "the word" is Jesus just as there is not direct reference stating that Jesus is God
If we read just a couple of sentences more we see that Jesus was raised from the dead by God (different entity) Colossians 2:12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
All of the other examples you use don't come close to Jesus making a claim of singularity with God
Now let's look at John 14:1 Do not let your heart be troubled; [a]believe in God, believe also in Me (key word also)
11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; (Notice there is no claim that they are the same Jesus has the spirit of God in him)
12 the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.(notice two entities father and son)
None of the items you have listed indicate that God and Jesus are the same Let's look first at what John 8 really says!
16 But even if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone in it, but I and the Father who sent Me (clearly not the same)
26 I have many things to speak and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and the things which I heard from Him, these I speak to the world.” 27 They did not realize that He had been speaking to them about the Father.
28 I do nothing on My own initiative, but I speak these things as the Father taught Me. 29 And He who sent Me is with Me; He [i]has not left Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him.”
(Jesus clearly considers himself the son and God the father)
Genesis 1:26 has nothing to do with Jesus at all
The next statement is from the Jews not Jesus they said lots of false things (irrelevant)
If we are using the Bible as the reference for this here is the evidence against Jesus and God being the same
Matt 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
26:39-53 This contains a prayer to God from Jesus
Matt 3:17 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased
John 12:27 Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.
John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
John 11:41 Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.
42 And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.
John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
John5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise
John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
Luke 22:42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
Mark 13: 32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
John 10:29-3829 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
The Zionist world rulers have already got this situation under control. Bayer the producer of Chlorine and Mustard gas and Monsanto the creators of Agent Orange have merged and control about 2/3 of the worlds food supply. Obama has given them immunity legally. They will be sure to keep the worlds population at a normal level.
Unfortunately the government has passed thousands of laws which can prevent peaceful people who aren't hurting anyone from just doing what they like and having fun. I enjoy making all kinds of alcoholic beverages yet if I get caught doing what I like to do I will be arrested.
YOU ARE A LIAR, they are selling plan B pills in vending machines. These are not abortion pills they are emergency contraceptives. They do have abortion pills but that is not what is being sold without a prescription. You must be under direct care of a doctor to get abortion pills.
That so true, look at the Native Americans who didn't have guns and were slaughtered by those who did. If you don't have the weapons to match your adversary you too will be part of that statistic. innocent people killed by guns. Yet if you too have a gun your chances of being attacked and killed drop to less than half. It's never a good thing to leave yourself defenseless by giving up your only means of protection (your Guns)
So what evidence is offered that the entire USA has only these gas reserves? Answer there is none. Since Big Oil has been one of the puppet masters of the world governments and are the ones who came up with the idea of claiming that oil was a biological by product of time and was a finite resource why would you believe them. It is a known documented fact that oil comes from depths beyond where any life has ever existed. They estimate these things and they are always wrong. New oil reserves are being found and areas that they thought they had depleted have been replenished. The oil industry doesn't publicize this for obvious financial reasons but look at the US oil export amounts. In the 70's there were only a couple of oil reserves left the world was going to run out of oil with in 20 years, Yet 40 years later the consumption rates are higher and there is plenty of oil. You can believe the propaganda if you wish but it is not the truth.
You make is sound as if you have legislation banning guns that magically the people who misuse them would not get them illegally. In a fairy tale this may be true but if we look at real life examples Heroin, Cocaine there is legislation banning both yet there is no US city where a person wanting cocaine or heroin can't get them illegally. The FACT of this matter is that these people will have guns if they want them.
Marx described three necessary phases toward achieving his idea of utopia.
Phase 1: A revolution must take place in order to overthrow the existing government. Marx emphasized the need for total destruction of the existing system in order to move on to Phase 2.
Phase 2: A dictator or elite leader (or leaders) must gain absolute control over the proletariat. During this phase, the new government exerts absolute control over the common citizen's personal choices -- including his or her education, religion, employment and even marriage. Collectivization of property and wealth must also take place.
Phase 3: Achievement of utopia. This phase has never been attained because it requires that all non-communists be destroyed in order for the Communist Party to achieve supreme equality. In a Marxist utopia, everyone would happily share property and wealth, free from the restrictions that class-based systems require. The government would control all means of production so that the one-class system would remain constant, with no possibility of any middle class citizens rising back to the top. (You can see the full text of the manifesto at this Web site.)
Marx also detailed the 10 essential tenets of communism, namely:
Central banking system
Government controlled education
Government controlled labor
Government ownership of transportation and communication vehicles
Government ownership of agricultural means and factories
Total abolition of private property
Property rights confiscation
Heavy income tax on everyone
Elimination of rights of inheritance
Regional planning
In the communist society that Marx described, the government has supreme authority through its total control of land and means of production. Because the government distributes land and property among the people, communism sets a standard of equality -- both economically and socially -- among its followers.
Why do you jump to anarchy. What about Democracy vs Communism. In Marxist Communism Government still controls everything. Wouldn't a true Democracy be better where instead of politicians we would have representatives bound by law to do as the people commanded by vote. No laws could be passed without 80% of the voting public passing it. This would prevent 51% controlling 49% The vast majority of the country would have to agree on anything oppressive. Right now we have a small % of 1% forcing the remainder of the country to follow the rules they lay out.
Agreed most people really don't get it, The Ruling class whether GOP or Dem are still the ruling class stealing wealth from the tax cattle (Us tax payers) and they take more and give less as time goes on.
The point the videos make as it is clear to see with your own eyes is not that cops rack up a death toll each year, but to actually witness what they are capable of and it's not just one or two it is a culture of violence. This is just a tiny portion of the abuses of law enforcement caught on video and shared on the internet. Just imagine the total amount that wasn't caught on video and shared. Thank you for the Washington Post DB I had overlooked that one.
I find it interesting that you always offer criticism, but never offer any ideas toward solution. At least I can understand that the problem is not that guns are evil or that guns make people evil and violent. The way to solve the problem of gun violence is to deal with the causes of violent crime. If our government wanted to lower the crime rate by 50% rather than have all of the police constantly harassing people for every little rule violation have them all only apprehend people who commit "crimes which have a clear victim" That means the crime must cause actual harm to another person. If these evil people use a gun to commit this harm the punishment should be harsh like minimum 20 years. This would insure that there would be no repeat violent offenses for 20 years. All 2nd murder convictions should be a mandatory death sentence (to insure that there would be no repeat violent crime from them) not as punishment but as a solution. Do away with gun free zones which statistically are the most likely to be targeted by a mass shooter. 96% of mass shootings have taken place in gun free zones
Being a marksman is a positive useful skill that allows the person to gather wild food and protect themselves from evil. That is what I would choose to be
A Marxist is a person who believes that they are nothing more than a slave to a government that can dictate every aspect of their life. I don't know why anyone would choose to be a Marxist.
But it has already been proven by Hillary that it isn't a crime even if you are Secretary of State where your job is National Security. It shouldn't even be a small issue someone with no high ranking government position.
Isn't that the truth, The only ways to be a good politician is by being the best liar in the group.
Our conversations are always the same I explain that you will never take the guns away from people who wish to use them for evil. This is provable using the "The War on Drugs" cocaine and heroin are outlawed in the USA 100% against the law to possess for any regular citizen. Yet in the USA you can go to any state, any city and purchase heroin or cocaine. Just a FACT You never have proposed any solution to gun violence just the statement that we need gun control. Which like Drug control clearly is not a solution.
You try to twist what I have said to fit your agenda like all people without answers do. I didn't say that I needed guns to shoot cops!!! What said and you can go read it again is that I need a gun to protect myself and family from evil people. Police are nothing more than people some good some evil. That is clearly not the same. It is sad that you must lie about my comments instead of offering evidence that there is some form of gun control that would change to violent nature of the people who commit violent crimes.
They normally say nothing because the truth doesn't agree with their agenda
He thinks that gang member buy their guns at the gun store, LOL
So you agree that no matter what laws there are against Gun ownership people will possess them illegally? Does this equate to only criminals will have guns? If that is the case would these laws benefit the law abiding citizens of the USA? This would mean that the law abiding citizens would be the only people unarmed and at the mercy of those with mal intent with an illegal gun
You have stated it correctly with strict gun restrictions you don't change the violent or criminal nature of the people who commit these crimes you only change the tools they use to commit them. Like in Europe where instead of killing 6 people with a gun they kill 20 with truck. Is that the solution?
Does this mean that the crime rate in Chicago has dropped dramatically or that gun violence has been substantially reduced. No crime and murder rates remain the same. This means that taking away thousands of guns doesn't improve the problem. The problem is with the people not the guns that is where the focus needs to be to solve the problem.
So what you are saying is that unless there is strict gun control world wide evil people will get guns from outside of the gun free zones. Brilliant, that is exactly what happens.
It seem that most people here don't truly understand what "Gun Control" is really about. It's like abortion, it's a ways for politicians to make money and keep the country divided. With either issue there is no strong desire to do much except "Show Boat" This gets folks riled up then lobby groups start on both sides of the issue. These lobby groups give the politicians loads of cash it works great for both sides so you must stir the pot regularly to keep the donations flowing. That is really what "Gun Control" is about. More assault style rifles were sold during the Obama admin than any other time in history. The NRA took in 10's of millions. It works
So far you have offer no ideas for improvement I have one question it seems that you are full of reasons that you want government to regulate guns stricter than they do now. In your opinion what Government Intervention is your answer??
You are making a number of wrong assumptions here. 30,000 gun deaths is an actual number. This however includes all gun related deaths like Suicide 40% of this number, law enforcement over 30% Which leaves 30% as a mix of accidental, domestic violence, self defense, gang violence, murder..
Let's start with the suicides if no gun was available would the outcome be the same? Since people without guns commit suicide every day I would say, YES
Let's look at Law enforcement are you lobbying to take the guns from them? If not then we can't count that 11,000 gun deaths per year (2017 figure) If that is your suggestion then how are they going to deal with all the criminals who have illegal guns once they are outlawed?
Now we are down to the people who you were referring to. What gun control measure is going to reduce this number substantially since there is no possible way to find all of the guns in the USA and eliminate them. Criminals will have guns and kill those who oppose them. You may get a small reduction in death in this area. Mass murder, as proven in other parts of the world there are other ways of mass murder than guns but maybe a slight reduction. Self defense - criminals win on this one is the reduction on this number a good thing? Accidental this number would be reduced but would people still die from accidents at the same rate? probably
The end result would be maybe 1 or 2 % success
What if the police put a person at every bar with a breathalyzer and anyone too drunk to drive safely they gave a ride home? That would save 100 times more people I've never heard a politician suggest that to save lives
