why do Americans hate communism so much? there are some brilliant documentaries on sky at the minute detailing the rise of the united states since its Independence. the wars it fought in.. and who it fought.. in all cases the US has seen the rise of communism as thee biggest threat and were more than willing to commit troops to various conflicts in an effort to prevent it spreading or in some cases resorting to assassination of democratically elected Representatives . I'm wondering what the problem is? over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west". capitalism has failed western society, the pryamid that the rich clamber to stay on top of.. the sides of which are getting steeper and more slippery daily. is it that America is run by the banks and it is 'they' infact who see communism as the threat? we have n.Korea labled 'communist' when it is infact a dictatorship it is no more communist than Kentucky. it seems handy to point to the hardship of the north Koreans and say thats communism for you. so whats the story? imo the problem seems to be corruption and greed.
communism in its purest form is fare and sustainable but corruption and cronyism destroys and undermines what it tries to achieve.
here in ireland we have democracy and free trade and yet cronyism and corruption have destroyed us also. so it follows that the real enemy of all systems of governance is corruption and yet no one has went to war to tackle it and here in ireland we cant even prosecute those who are patently guilty of destroying a country.
Quote from: hardstation on December 23, 2011, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
why do Americans hate communism so much?
'Cos it doesn't work.
Its up there with extreme-capitalism, religion and Jedward for being stupid.
Seems we have exposed another Shinner red-under-the-bed ;)
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 23, 2011, 11:15:12 PM
Quote from: hardstation on December 23, 2011, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
why do Americans hate communism so much?
'Cos it doesn't work.
It up there with extreme-Capitalism, religion and Jedward for being stupid.
Human nature dictates that the ideal wouldn't work.
There will always be corruption.
Quote from: hardstation on December 23, 2011, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
why do Americans hate communism so much?
'Cos it doesn't work.
a simplistic view. but why are they so worried what other countries do or what system of governance they have? the us deals/trades happily with many fifedoms where there is no democracy
It is the antithesis of The American Dream is why they hate it.
Quote from: el_cuervo_fc on December 23, 2011, 11:22:48 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 23, 2011, 11:15:12 PM
Quote from: hardstation on December 23, 2011, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
why do Americans hate communism so much?
'Cos it doesn't work.
It up there with extreme-Capitalism, religion and Jedward for being stupid.
Human nature dictates that the ideal wouldn't work.
There will always be corruption.
then surely the corrupt should be prosecuted with the full force of the law and sentancing for corruption should be equal to that for murder since corruption is every societys problem
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:27:07 PM
Quote from: el_cuervo_fc on December 23, 2011, 11:22:48 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 23, 2011, 11:15:12 PM
Quote from: hardstation on December 23, 2011, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
why do Americans hate communism so much?
'Cos it doesn't work.
It up there with extreme-Capitalism, religion and Jedward for being stupid.
Human nature dictates that the ideal wouldn't work.
There will always be corruption.
then surely the corrupt should be prosecuted with the full force of the law and sentancing for corruption should be equal to that for murder since corruption is every societys problem
It's the ones at the top though. They hold all the cards
Not far away from capitalism then
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 23, 2011, 11:26:03 PM
It is the antithesis of The American Dream is why they hate it.
so what is the american dream? a society where poor folk cant see a doctor? americans see the national health system as communism. granny dumping? re the film 'sickos'
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 23, 2011, 11:15:12 PM
Quote from: hardstation on December 23, 2011, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
why do Americans hate communism so much?
'Cos it doesn't work.
Its up there with extreme-capitalism, religion and Jedward for being stupid.
Seems we have exposed another Shinner red-under-the-bed ;)
who's "we"
Quote from: theskull1 on December 23, 2011, 11:30:57 PM
Not far away from capitalism then
The greater the power the greater the sense of entitlement. Works for communism or capitalism
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:32:34 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 23, 2011, 11:15:12 PM
Quote from: hardstation on December 23, 2011, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
why do Americans hate communism so much?
'Cos it doesn't work.
Its up there with extreme-capitalism, religion and Jedward for being stupid.
Seems we have exposed another Shinner red-under-the-bed ;)
who's "we"
Lawnseed,do you actually think communism has a place in Ireland?
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 23, 2011, 11:26:03 PM
It is the antithesis of The American Dream is why they hate it.
Take other peoples stuff. O, actually that's Communism too.
The problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails. The Yanks problem with it is that it abolishes the need to make a profit from the sale of products and hence would abolish privileged based on wealth. A turkey is never going to vote for Christmas.
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 23, 2011, 11:36:02 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 23, 2011, 11:26:03 PM
It is the antithesis of The American Dream is why they hate it.
Take other peoples stuff. O, actually that's Communism too.
i think you've made my point. now whats the solution? getting sucked into the united states of france/germany? wheres our democracy now?
Quote from: Ulick on December 23, 2011, 11:38:53 PM
The problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails. The Yanks problem with it is that it abolishes the need to make a profit from the sale of products and hence would abolish privileged based on wealth. A turkey is never going to vote for Christmas.
exactly! it has never been tried. pure communism has never been tried. it might be worth reminding people that devs dreamland ireland would now be considered communist but corruption and greed left him clinging on to power with a paper to publish his propaganda surrounded by cronies
'pure communism has never been tried'
Open the papers any day of the week and read about the greedy, the needy, the twisted, the sick, the insane, the biblically ensconced, the evil, the lazy, and the downright simple who live in our world.
Then please, FFS, let me know how you would arrange an egalitarian society around the above without having a group of people to marshall them, and ergo defeat egalitarianism.
Communism is a great concept, but a terrible idea.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:42:10 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 23, 2011, 11:36:02 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 23, 2011, 11:26:03 PM
It is the antithesis of The American Dream is why they hate it.
Take other peoples stuff. O, actually that's Communism too.
i think you've made my point. now whats the solution? getting sucked into the united states of france/germany? wheres our democracy now?
Well while I am not be a fan of being a member of the United States of Franco-Germania, I am a fan of a United Europe as a democratic federal republic. Ireland being a unified state within that republic.
Quote from: thewobbler on December 24, 2011, 12:02:18 AM
'pure communism has never been tried'
Open the papers any day of the week and read about the greedy, the needy, the twisted, the sick, the insane, the biblically ensconced, the evil, the lazy, and the downright simple who live in our world.
Then please, FFS, let me know how you would arrange an egalitarian society around the above without having a group of people to marshall them, and ergo defeat egalitarianism.
Communism is a great concept, but a terrible idea.
We would need to develop a hive brain, losing all individuality. We would conquer the stars to the edge of the universe, but we wouldn't enjoy a bit of it.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west".
::)
Quote from: thewobbler on December 24, 2011, 12:02:18 AM
'pure communism has never been tried'
Open the papers any day of the week and read about the greedy, the needy, the twisted, the sick, the insane, the biblically ensconced, the evil, the lazy, and the downright simple who live in our world.
Then please, FFS, let me know how you would arrange an egalitarian society around the above without having a group of people to marshall them, and ergo defeat egalitarianism.
Communism is a great concept, but a terrible idea.
so capitalism keeps the above group of people "in their place" I'd suggest to you that a good few of your rag tag misfits are actually running the show at the moment. i notice you avoid "the poor" they are such a nuisance
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
we have n.Korea labled 'communist' when it is infact a dictatorship it is no more communist than Kentucky.
Oh. My. f**king. God.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on December 24, 2011, 12:13:30 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west".
::)
explain eamon
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 24, 2011, 12:05:54 AM
Quote from: thewobbler on December 24, 2011, 12:02:18 AM
'pure communism has never been tried'
Open the papers any day of the week and read about the greedy, the needy, the twisted, the sick, the insane, the biblically ensconced, the evil, the lazy, and the downright simple who live in our world.
Then please, FFS, let me know how you would arrange an egalitarian society around the above without having a group of people to marshall them, and ergo defeat egalitarianism.
Communism is a great concept, but a terrible idea.
We would need to develop a hive brain, losing all individuality. We would conquer the stars to the edge of the universe, but we wouldn't enjoy a bit of it.
ala the united states of europe. run by bureaucrats.. unelected bureaucrats! sounds familar?
Since all systems are going to have some corruption creeping into them, you have to ask which is more prone to it. This economically illiterate nonsense about capitalism having "failed" the west is something that crops up every time a problem develops in the world's financial system. I remember the same apocalyptic doom-mongers rubbing their hands gleefully about capitalism's imminent demise during the Asian financial crisis in 1997, during Argentina's default in 2002, and sure enough they have emerged again as predictably as serial end-of-the-world predictor Harold Camping.
What they don't understand is that the capitalist system, for all its faults, allows for corrections. When too many resources have been allocated into the wrong area where there's not enough demand (like an oversupply of housing) then a period of recession comes in as nature's way of correcting the problem. Yes it is painful and yes it causes hardship for individuals who now have to wait until the system gets better aligned with reality, but this is not capitalism dying; this is capitalism working.
The Communist system has no such checks or balances. It is a controlled economy that relies on the people at the top knowing exactly where the demand is and assigning production to meet it. In an ideal world this would work fine, but in the real world the economy of even a small country is such a complex animal that not even the smartest man on gaaboard.com (that'd be me) can predict it or fully understand it. Markets are the only mechanism that can come even close to adequately matching supply with demand.
Here's an example. In Soviet Russia the government decided to reward the people in charge of the railways in terms of how many miles of freight they moved. Sounds sensible, right? Well what happened next was the railway people loaded their trains full of goods and sent it across the Trans-Siberian Railway to Vladivostok and back. They responded logically to the fucked up incentives they were given, and the result was waste on a grand scale. The cost of that waste then had to be borne by the Soviet consumer.
Here's another example. In Moscow hotels you'd see people sitting at desks on every floor. Their job was to sit there and hand out room keys to guests coming and going. One person in the foyer could do the same amount of work along with a host of other duties, but in the interests of creating "full employment" you had a country full of people working in these "non jobs." You might think a lift attendant is a waste of money until you see a lift attendant on every floor of the hotel. The cost of these wages then had to be passed on to the consumer resulting in hotels that only the rich and foreign tourists could afford to stay in.
Multiply that kind of inefficiency throughout the whole economic system and you have a country in which everything is so damn expensive that the people live in abject poverty with no way of changing the system. The laws of supply-and-demand were completely ignored and the whole system became unsustainable. Basic staples such as food were so scarce that they had to be rationed by means of making people stand in queues to wait for a chance to buy what little was left. Communism's collapse was bloody inevitable. The only reason it took so long was because the regimes that kept the system in place did so with an iron fist and to go out and protest against it was to take your life in your hands, as the students in Beijing found out to their cost.
The problem with Communism is that it's such a breathtakingly unsustainable system that the only way to implement it is to impose it on the people whether they want it or not, and to forcibly keep it in place no matter how much the people hate it when it inevitably fails them.
By the way, globalized capitalism has lifted millions of people out of poverty. Brazil, Russia, India and China, all of whom have adopted market reforms, are the rising economic powers of the 21st century as their people become better off. This didn't happen by adopting Communist principles but by rejecting them.
Quote from: hardstation on December 24, 2011, 12:23:07 AM
Lawnseed. The World. Communism. Lovely.
i am not promoting communism as a system of governance. i am merely asking what is "Americas problem with communism?" in the handful of posts so far on this question no one has yet given a plausible reason for such venom against communism. the one thing that gets yanks going is the 'battle' against communism and yet Americans are perfectly happy to tr**p over injured and sick Americans on American streets who don't have medical insurance. the government of this great democracy are happy to intern US citizens never mind foreigners indefinitely. WE know how that went. if communism is such a failed system why are Americans so afraid of OTHER countries trying it out. the US meddled in the political affairs of south American countries that they saw developing Marxist type ideologies by actively promoting and aiding criminal gangs in those countries in efforts to destabilise them. they actually bombed south American government buildings killing all that were inside then introducing punitive sanctions announcing how they would bring that country 'back to the stoneage'. whats that about? why do they care?
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on December 24, 2011, 12:42:24 AM
The Communist system has no such checks or balances. It is a controlled economy that relies on the people at the top knowing exactly where the demand is and assigning production to meet it. In an ideal world this would work fine, but in the real world the economy of even a small country is such a complex animal that not even the smartest man on gaaboard.com (that'd be me) can predict it or fully understand it. Markets are the only mechanism that can come even close to adequately matching supply with demand.
Here's an example. In Soviet Russia the government decided to reward the people in charge of the railways in terms of how many miles of freight they moved. Sounds sensible, right? Well what happened next was the railway people loaded their trains full of goods and sent it across the Trans-Siberian Railway to Vladivostok and back. They responded logically to the fucked up incentives they were given, and the result was waste on a grand scale. The cost of that waste then had to be borne by the Soviet consumer.
Here's another example. In Moscow hotels you'd see people sitting at desks on every floor. Their job was to sit there and hand out room keys to guests coming and going. One person in the foyer could do the same amount of work along with a host of other duties, but in the interests of creating "full employment" you had a country full of people working in these "non jobs." You might think a lift attendant is a waste of money until you see a lift attendant on every floor of the hotel. The cost of these wages then had to be passed on to the consumer resulting in hotels that only the rich and foreign tourists could afford to stay in.
Multiply that kind of inefficiency throughout the whole economic system and you have a country in which everything is so damn expensive that the people live in abject poverty with no way of changing the system. The laws of supply-and-demand were completely ignored and the whole system became unsustainable. Basic staples such as food were so scarce that they had to be rationed by means of making people stand in queues to wait for a chance to buy what little was left. Communism's collapse was bloody inevitable. The only reason it took so long was because the regimes that kept the system in place did so with an iron fist and to go out and protest against it was to take your life in your hands, as the students in Beijing found out to their cost.
The problem with Communism is that it's such a breathtakingly unsustainable system that the only way to implement it is to impose it on the people whether they want it or not, and to forcibly keep it in place no matter how much the people hate it when it inevitably fails them.
By the way, globalized capitalism has lifted millions of people out of poverty. Brazil, Russia, India and China, all of whom have adopted market reforms, are the rising economic powers of the 21st century as their people become better off. This didn't happen by adopting Communist principles but by rejecting them.
As I said earlier, the problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried.
That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails.
QuoteWhat they don't understand is that the capitalist system, for all its faults, allows for corrections. QuoteWhen too many resources have been allocated into the wrong area where there's not enough demand (like an oversupply of housing) then a period of recession comes in as nature's way of correcting the problem.
Yes it is painful and yes it causes hardship for individuals who now have to wait until the system gets better aligned with reality, but this is not capitalism dying; this is capitalism working.
Only if the people who invested in this system pay when the recession comes.
QuoteYes it is painful and yes it causes hardship for individuals who now have to wait until the system gets better aligned with reality, but this is not capitalism dying; this is capitalism working
It is forcing ordinary hard working people into paying for the decisions made by money lenders and their respective Governments to bail them out.
How many banks have paid for their gambling debts?
We are paying for losing bets made by the banks while the bank share holders ciollect the winnings on successful bets,
all true eamon except i'd point out to you that the 'bric' countries are where the haves are making a killing out of the have nots. and whats happening is that instead of having 'poor countries' what capitalism is bringing is poor people in every country as the gap between rich and poor increases. what unregulated markets have brought is boom then bust.. boom then bust and each time the rich get richer and the small man gets edged out. the last american president who tried to rest power in america from the banks was assassinated. what followed was the 'roaring twenties' closely followed by the great depression.
if you are right about the markets then why are the irish people up to their necks in debt paying of the debts of private individuals/banks? why if they have shown poor judgment in business are they not allowed to fail. the answer can only be corruption and cronyism since it is not pure capitalism
Quote from: Ulick on December 24, 2011, 01:00:38 AM
As I said earlier, the problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails.
I was in Russia in 1990. I can assure you that they were trying it then. I'm well aware of what it entails, thank you very much.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 01:08:40 AM
all true eamon except i'd point out to you that the 'bric' countries are where the haves are making a killing out of the have nots. and whats happening is that instead of having 'poor countries' what capitalism is bringing is poor people in every country as the gap between rich and poor increases. what unregulated markets have brought is boom then bust.. boom then bust and each time the rich get richer and the small man gets edged out. the last american president who tried to rest power in america from the banks was assassinated. what followed was the 'roaring twenties' closely followed by the great depression.
if you are right about the markets then why are the irish people up to their necks in debt paying of the debts of private individuals/banks? why if they have shown poor judgment in business are they not allowed to fail. the answer can only be corruption and cronyism since it is not pure capitalism
I never said that 100% unregulated markets are the answer. I've always been of the view that markets are reasonably good at producing wealth, not so good at distributing wealth, and in cases where the will of the market does not coincide with the public interest then it's okay for government to step in and get regulating.
I'm not sure what you mean by the BRICs making a killing out of the have-nots.
To answer the main question there was a bit of paranoia about Communism in the 60s. There was a fear that the idea could leak across borders and take root in America, so those who were opposed to it sought to vilify it by any means necessary and indulge in with-hunts like the McCarthy hearings.
The invasion of sovereign states was out of fear that the Communist system was so abhorrent that it had to be stopped from spreading around the world. I'm just guessing here, but WWII would still have been a recent memory, so the spread of fascism in Europe was a very real memory. There would have been the fear that communism and the far left would gain popular support in the same way that fascism and the far right had only a few decades before. Hence the policy of "containment".
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on December 24, 2011, 04:02:40 AM
Quote from: Ulick on December 24, 2011, 01:00:38 AM
As I said earlier, the problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails.
I was in Russia in 1990. I can assure you that they were trying it then. I'm well aware of what it entails, thank you very much.
Russia was never a Communist country. That you are using it as an example in your argument against communism shows you haven't a foggy notion of what it entails.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PMI'm wondering what the problem is? over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west".
You've not talked to much of that population, have you?
Ulick, instead of coming across as snidey, why don't you just tell us what 'real communism' is?
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 11:42:11 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PMI'm wondering what the problem is? over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west".
You've not talked to much of that population, have you?
what you want to hear is that these countries were horrible places? places where parents have to pull their kids out of bed at 5am and leave them in creches then work like slaves til dark then take their kids home and put them in bed week in week out.. places where when the kids grow up they'll have to finish paying the parents mortgage before they have one of their own. places where only the rich have access to proper medical care, places where an elite gather all the wealth and maintain control of their political stooges manipulating them so as to avoid taxes and the rule of law. places where the state broadcaster/print media brainwash the population. places where the youth yearn to leave their homeland to find work escaping years of austerity. places far away? i suggest to you that the population of those countries were as well off as s.irish people are now despite seventy years of "freedom".
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 12:55:22 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 11:42:11 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PMI'm wondering what the problem is? over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west".
You've not talked to much of that population, have you?
what you want to hear is that these countries were horrible places? places where parents have to pull their kids out of bed at 5am and leave them in creches then work like slaves til dark then take their kids home and put them in bed week in week out.. places where when the kids grow up they'll have to finish paying the parents mortgage before they have one of their own. places where only the rich have access to proper medical care, places where an elite gather all the wealth and maintain control of their political stooges manipulating them so as to avoid taxes and the rule of law. places where the state broadcaster/print media brainwash the population. places where the youth yearn to leave their homeland to find work escaping years of austerity. places far away? i suggest to you that the population of those countries were as well off as s.irish people are now despite seventy years of "freedom".
I don't have to hear it from you - I used to live in Leipzig. i heard it from my neighbours and colleagues exactly as you describe, less the mortgages. And replace the rich with the party elite.
Instead they had no rights to passports or external travel, no chance to emigrate, no freedom of speech, association or action, barely any freedom of thought.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on December 24, 2011, 04:06:06 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 01:08:40 AM
all true eamon except i'd point out to you that the 'bric' countries are where the haves are making a killing out of the have nots. and whats happening is that instead of having 'poor countries' what capitalism is bringing is poor people in every country as the gap between rich and poor increases. what unregulated markets have brought is boom then bust.. boom then bust and each time the rich get richer and the small man gets edged out. the last american president who tried to rest power in america from the banks was assassinated. what followed was the 'roaring twenties' closely followed by the great depression.
if you are right about the markets then why are the irish people up to their necks in debt paying of the debts of private individuals/banks? why if they have shown poor judgment in business are they not allowed to fail. the answer can only be corruption and cronyism since it is not pure capitalism
I never said that 100% unregulated markets are the answer. I've always been of the view that markets are reasonably good at producing wealth, not so good at distributing wealth, and in cases where the will of the market does not coincide with the public interest then it's okay for government to step in and get regulating.
I'm not sure what you mean by the BRICs making a killing out of the have-nots.
what i refer to is that the countries known as bric are low wage economies were western companies have set up to make a killing out of cheap labour, then selling the same product to the numpty western consumer. infact through time draining these western countries of jobs and wealth while flouting laws on child labour, health and safety and pollution. how sustainable is that
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 01:03:28 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 12:55:22 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 11:42:11 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PMI'm wondering what the problem is? over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west".
You've not talked to much of that population, have you?
what you want to hear is that these countries were horrible places? places where parents have to pull their kids out of bed at 5am and leave them in creches then work like slaves til dark then take their kids home and put them in bed week in week out.. places where when the kids grow up they'll have to finish paying the parents mortgage before they have one of their own. places where only the rich have access to proper medical care, places where an elite gather all the wealth and maintain control of their political stooges manipulating them so as to avoid taxes and the rule of law. places where the state broadcaster/print media brainwash the population. places where the youth yearn to leave their homeland to find work escaping years of austerity. places far away? i suggest to you that the population of those countries were as well off as s.irish people are now despite seventy years of "freedom".
I don't have to hear it from you - I used to live in Leipzig. i heard it from my neighbours and colleagues exactly as you describe, less the mortgages. And replace the rich with the party elite.
Instead they had no rights to passports or external travel, no chance to emigrate, no freedom of speech, association or action, barely any freedom of thought.
i refer you to the lone protesrter who stood infront of a irish government ministers car, a donegal man living in dublin who was beaten to a pulp, hospitalised then prosecuted for protesting. and to the gardai and army busy training for "crowd control" at dundalk race course. i further suggest that this country is glad that its youth are emmigrating because they cant afford them
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 12:55:22 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 11:42:11 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 23, 2011, 11:07:53 PMI'm wondering what the problem is? over the last 70 years half the worlds population have lived under communism and for most part have got along equally as well as us here in the "free west".
You've not talked to much of that population, have you?
what you want to hear is that these countries were horrible places? places where parents have to pull their kids out of bed at 5am and leave them in creches then work like slaves til dark then take their kids home and put them in bed week in week out.. places where when the kids grow up they'll have to finish paying the parents mortgage before they have one of their own. places where only the rich have access to proper medical care, places where an elite gather all the wealth and maintain control of their political stooges manipulating them so as to avoid taxes and the rule of law. places where the state broadcaster/print media brainwash the population. places where the youth yearn to leave their homeland to find work escaping years of austerity. places far away? i suggest to you that the population of those countries were as well off as s.irish people are now despite seventy years of "freedom".
Or like these other Socialist/Workers utopia you could have millions working in fields all day to scrape the equivalent of a dollar a day to survive on whilst the billionaire Party elite live a life of (Western) decadence behind closed doors. When the people decide they've had enough they dont have the ballot box to make changes. When they try alternative means they are crushed by regimes with human rights records amongst the worst on earth. Power to the people.
(http://www.southofheaven.smartemail.co.uk/smith.jpg)
Quote from: thewobbler on December 24, 2011, 12:02:41 PM
Ulick, instead of coming across as snidey, why don't you just tell us what 'real communism' is?
Wobbler I've had this debate on here before and I just find the ignorance of the concept tiresome. The Internet is full of wonderful informative resources nowadays, if someone wants to seriously debate a topic the least they could do is firstly go off and familiarize themselves with it before compounding the ignorance. Here's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
To say that Russia or the Soviet Union was communist is as nonsensical to saying NI is a republic because Sinn Féin are in government.
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 01:03:28 PM
I don't have to hear it from you - I used to live in Leipzig. i heard it from my neighbours and colleagues exactly as you describe, less the mortgages. And replace the rich with the party elite.
Instead they had no rights to passports or external travel, no chance to emigrate, no freedom of speech, association or action, barely any freedom of thought.
What makes you think any of those are intrinsic to communism? Zimbabwe could be said to have all of those features but no one claims it to be communist or indeed associates capitalism with those things because Zimbabwe is capitalist.
google.. 'history of us military interventions since 1890' interesting reading
Quote from: Ulick on December 24, 2011, 01:33:36 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 01:03:28 PM
I don't have to hear it from you - I used to live in Leipzig. i heard it from my neighbours and colleagues exactly as you describe, less the mortgages. And replace the rich with the party elite.
Instead they had no rights to passports or external travel, no chance to emigrate, no freedom of speech, association or action, barely any freedom of thought.
What makes you think any of those are intrinsic to communism? Zimbabwe could be said to have all of those features but no one claims it to be communist or indeed associates capitalism with those things because Zimbabwe is capitalist.
Not at all, nor even that the East German regime was "pure communist".
i was arguing that Lawnseed's point that those who have lived under communism have had an equal quality of life to those in Western Europe. Which is categorically horsesh*te, in every possible way.
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 01:45:14 PM
Quote from: Ulick on December 24, 2011, 01:33:36 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 01:03:28 PM
I don't have to hear it from you - I used to live in Leipzig. i heard it from my neighbours and colleagues exactly as you describe, less the mortgages. And replace the rich with the party elite.
Instead they had no rights to passports or external travel, no chance to emigrate, no freedom of speech, association or action, barely any freedom of thought.
What makes you think any of those are intrinsic to communism? Zimbabwe could be said to have all of those features but no one claims it to be communist or indeed associates capitalism with those things because Zimbabwe is capitalist.
Not at all, nor even that the East German regime was "pure communist".
i was arguing that Lawnseed's point that those who have lived under communism have had an equal quality of life to those in Western Europe. Which is categorically horsesh*te, in every possible way.
so the irish government bending over at every opportunity is nothing like living in satelite soviet state? as for freedom of speech.. this forum is as near as you'll get to it and even here the wrong type of freedom could land you in court. i too worked in east germany just after the wall came down, what i found was that the poeple were not that badly off, just envious of what they perceived to be the better life in west germany. getting coke and mcdonalds isnt everything just ask the millions of people in those bric countries who have developed type 2 diabetes since exposure to our 'better' western diet
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PM
so the irish government bending over at every opportunity is nothing like living in satelite soviet state?
What!?
I mean I don't know, not being irish and all, but are you seriously trying to tell me that life in an open EU democracy is akin to life in a Soviet satellite state.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMas for freedom of speech.. this forum is as near as you'll get to it and even here the wrong type of freedom could land you in court.
i'm not familliar with RoI's laws on defamation and the internet, so i can't comment, I'm afraid.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMi too worked in east germany just after the wall came down, what i found was that the poeple were not that badly off, just envious of what they perceived to be the better life in west germany.
The population of the DDR had less personal wealth, and the state near bankrupted itself trying to improve living standards in the early 80s. But that's not why they had a lower quality of life. If you really don't understand that - if you really think that the Ossis had a similar quality of life in the West, then you're wither deluded, terminally thick, or both.
In the season that's in it and all, I'd think the lad's birthday we celebrate in a number of hours was a "Communist".
I'd also think that the closest living example (s) we have today are:
The Amis (sorry for spelling, but the lads in the US with beards and dull clothing)
The Kabutz communities (sorry again for the spelling, but the glasses of wine whilst cooking the Christmas dinner for tonight are having an impact).
With reference to "USSR Communism", I'd compare that more to a facist dictatorship; although I'd agree with their insistence on the use of the "Upper case" letter
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 02:32:58 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PM
so the irish government bending over at every opportunity is nothing like living in satelite soviet state?
What!?
I mean I don't know, not being irish and all, but are you seriously trying to tell me that life in an open EU democracy is akin to life in a Soviet satellite state.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMas for freedom of speech.. this forum is as near as you'll get to it and even here the wrong type of freedom could land you in court.
i'm not familliar with RoI's laws on defamation and the internet, so i can't comment, I'm afraid.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMi too worked in east germany just after the wall came down, what i found was that the poeple were not that badly off, just envious of what they perceived to be the better life in west germany.
The population of the DDR had less personal wealth, and the state near bankrupted itself trying to improve living standards in the early 80s. But that's not why they had a lower quality of life. If you really don't understand that - if you really think that the Ossis had a similar quality of life in the West, then you're wither deluded, terminally thick, or both.
so having the trappings of wealth indicates a higher standard of living...eg people who drive a bmw or a merc are happier because?? my father reared 9 of us on a small farm we had no phone, we had an old car, we got an education til we were 16. neither of my parents went to work other than farming my father bought two neighbouring small farms and paid for them without going to the bank. for my part i work 6days, mrs lawn works 5 days we struggle with our bills with 3 kids we need two cars and we have a phone. to my way of thinking my father had a better life than i'm having. he ceiled 4 nights a week and never missed a wake. i havent time to take the kids to football. i bought into the american dream so to speak i built a house and got a mortgage by the time its paid for it will need gutted. that 2nd loan will see me into my retirement without a penny. should i have the misfortune to live much longer than that i'll have to sell the home i've worked for to pay for my old age leaving my children sweet nothing i'll bet that over half the posters on this forum can tell a similar story. some dream ::)
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 01:45:14 PM
Quote from: Ulick on December 24, 2011, 01:33:36 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 01:03:28 PM
I don't have to hear it from you - I used to live in Leipzig. i heard it from my neighbours and colleagues exactly as you describe, less the mortgages. And replace the rich with the party elite.
Instead they had no rights to passports or external travel, no chance to emigrate, no freedom of speech, association or action, barely any freedom of thought.
What makes you think any of those are intrinsic to communism? Zimbabwe could be said to have all of those features but no one claims it to be communist or indeed associates capitalism with those things because Zimbabwe is capitalist.
Not at all, nor even that the East German regime was "pure communist".
i was arguing that Lawnseed's point that those who have lived under communism have had an equal quality of life to those in Western Europe. Which is categorically horsesh*te, in every possible way.
so the irish government bending over at every opportunity is nothing like living in satelite soviet state? as for freedom of speech.. this forum is as near as you'll get to it and even here the wrong type of freedom could land you in court. i too worked in east germany just after the wall came down, what i found was that the poeple were not that badly off, just envious of what they perceived to be the better life in west germany. getting coke and mcdonalds isnt everything just ask the millions of people in those bric countries who have developed type 2 diabetes since exposure to our 'better' western diet
In Communist countries you have no way of getting rid of the boss, democratically anyway. As for the "western diet", it's nice to have a choice.
Ammmmmmmm.....
Are any of you missing the fact that the country is completely Donald Ducked because of capitalism? Communism or Socialism has never been given the proper chance to work. It was met at every corner by Yanks and Brits who rely on the Free Market to make the ruling classes rich!!!
It's a very young idea compared to Capitalism. But I know which one definitely doesn't work.
World hunger and poverty - Capitalism's fault.
World Wars - Capitalism's fault.
Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan conflicts/occupations - Capitalism's fault.
Dole ques in Ireland - Capitalism's fault.
Nearly all of our ills are Capitalism's fault friends. Socialism can fix it and can exist in Ireland. Socialism is about love, care, share and all the rest of the positive traits we as humans possess and we can capitalise (excuse the pun) on these with a proper system instead of capitalising on the negative human traits.
People think of Communism and think black and white, East Germany, the Stasi etc. That's just lazy. Imagine an Ireland where everyone was equal and everyone earned equally. For every millionaire in Ireland there are 100,000 people living in poverty. What's wrong with having 100,001 people living and earning the same amount? Something between 5 - 10% of the people in Ireland own between 90 - 95% of the wealth. How can this EVER be justified?
No-one will ever convince me that Capitalism is a better way than Socialism.
minder we had a democratic change of government here less than a year ago we changed leaders.. nothing has changed.
the results of a health survey carried out on two work forces one in India and one in china(same company) who gained access to the western diet eg fast food and precooked meals because they were working for western companies were so bad that the Chinese government refused to let the survey continue. in India 40% of the workers surveyed were showing signs of type 2. diabetes in India has historically been amongst the lowest on earth.
what I'm driving at is that i believe we are being farmed like cattle here in the 'free west' and basically we are no more free than the countries we c**k a snook at. i think that America fears communism because its run by huge businesses who fund/buy the politicians they want to do the business for them. eg George bush during his oil industry funded regime. he by his criminal actions cause the price of oil to treble he was actually a great president for those who paid to keep him there. obamas campaign was funded by the pharmaceutical industry- changes to health regulations have seen billions pour into their bank accounts. under communist governance these huge organisations would be nationalised and come under the ownership of the state rendering them powerless to control. i think these outfits see the appeal of communism to the ordinary man and it scares the shiet out of them.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 09:40:34 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 02:32:58 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PM
so the irish government bending over at every opportunity is nothing like living in satelite soviet state?
What!?
I mean I don't know, not being irish and all, but are you seriously trying to tell me that life in an open EU democracy is akin to life in a Soviet satellite state.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMas for freedom of speech.. this forum is as near as you'll get to it and even here the wrong type of freedom could land you in court.
i'm not familliar with RoI's laws on defamation and the internet, so i can't comment, I'm afraid.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMi too worked in east germany just after the wall came down, what i found was that the poeple were not that badly off, just envious of what they perceived to be the better life in west germany.
The population of the DDR had less personal wealth, and the state near bankrupted itself trying to improve living standards in the early 80s. But that's not why they had a lower quality of life. If you really don't understand that - if you really think that the Ossis had a similar quality of life in the West, then you're wither deluded, terminally thick, or both.
so having the trappings of wealth indicates a higher standard of living...eg people who drive a bmw or a merc are happier because?? my father reared 9 of us on a small farm we had no phone, we had an old car, we got an education til we were 16. neither of my parents went to work other than farming my father bought two neighbouring small farms and paid for them without going to the bank. for my part i work 6days, mrs lawn works 5 days we struggle with our bills with 3 kids we need two cars and we have a phone. to my way of thinking my father had a better life than i'm having. he ceiled 4 nights a week and never missed a wake. i havent time to take the kids to football. i bought into the american dream so to speak i built a house and got a mortgage by the time its paid for it will need gutted. that 2nd loan will see me into my retirement without a penny. should i have the misfortune to live much longer than that i'll have to sell the home i've worked for to pay for my old age leaving my children sweet nothing i'll bet that over half the posters on this forum can tell a similar story. some dream ::)
What...your father owned land :o
Thankfully Stalin wiped out kulak's like you. We dont want class enemy landowners like you polluting the revolution when it comes.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 10:11:27 PM
minder we had a democratic change of government here less than a year ago we changed leaders.. nothing has changed.
Time to install the Sinn Féin Peoples Politburo to put us on the straight and narrow.
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 12:08:27 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 10:11:27 PM
minder we had a democratic change of government here less than a year ago we changed leaders.. nothing has changed.
Time to install the Sinn Féin Peoples Politburo to put us on the straight and narrow.
Trust me, the Monster Raving Looney party would be more trusted than Fine Gael.
Quote from: 4father on December 25, 2011, 12:38:47 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 12:08:27 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 10:11:27 PM
minder we had a democratic change of government here less than a year ago we changed leaders.. nothing has changed.
Time to install the Sinn Féin Peoples Politburo to put us on the straight and narrow.
Trust me, the Monster Raving Looney party would be more trusted than Fine Gael.
They still got a lot more votes than the Shinners in the G.E.
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 24, 2011, 10:50:16 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 09:40:34 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 02:32:58 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PM
so the irish government bending over at every opportunity is nothing like living in satelite soviet state?
What!?
I mean I don't know, not being irish and all, but are you seriously trying to tell me that life in an open EU democracy is akin to life in a Soviet satellite state.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMas for freedom of speech.. this forum is as near as you'll get to it and even here the wrong type of freedom could land you in court.
i'm not familliar with RoI's laws on defamation and the internet, so i can't comment, I'm afraid.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMi too worked in east germany just after the wall came down, what i found was that the poeple were not that badly off, just envious of what they perceived to be the better life in west germany.
The population of the DDR had less personal wealth, and the state near bankrupted itself trying to improve living standards in the early 80s. But that's not why they had a lower quality of life. If you really don't understand that - if you really think that the Ossis had a similar quality of life in the West, then you're wither deluded, terminally thick, or both.
so having the trappings of wealth indicates a higher standard of living...eg people who drive a bmw or a merc are happier because?? my father reared 9 of us on a small farm we had no phone, we had an old car, we got an education til we were 16. neither of my parents went to work other than farming my father bought two neighbouring small farms and paid for them without going to the bank. for my part i work 6days, mrs lawn works 5 days we struggle with our bills with 3 kids we need two cars and we have a phone. to my way of thinking my father had a better life than i'm having. he ceiled 4 nights a week and never missed a wake. i havent time to take the kids to football. i bought into the american dream so to speak i built a house and got a mortgage by the time its paid for it will need gutted. that 2nd loan will see me into my retirement without a penny. should i have the misfortune to live much longer than that i'll have to sell the home i've worked for to pay for my old age leaving my children sweet nothing i'll bet that over half the posters on this forum can tell a similar story. some dream ::)
What...your father owned land :o
Thankfully Stalin wiped out kulak's like you. We dont want class enemy landowners like you polluting the revolution when it comes.
He is lucky he lives in the E.U. and doesn't have Mugabe's henchmen around to redistribute their land holdings.
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 04:29:23 AM
Quote from: 4father on December 25, 2011, 12:38:47 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 12:08:27 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 10:11:27 PM
minder we had a democratic change of government here less than a year ago we changed leaders.. nothing has changed.
Time to install the Sinn Féin Peoples Politburo to put us on the straight and narrow.
Trust me, the Monster Raving Looney party would be more trusted than Fine Gael.
They still got a lot more votes than the Shinners in the G.E.
If an election was held tomorrow, do you believe FG would still win?
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 24, 2011, 10:50:16 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 09:40:34 PM
Quote from: LondonCamanachd on December 24, 2011, 02:32:58 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PM
so the Irish government bending over at every opportunity is nothing like living in satelite soviet state?
What!?
I mean I don't know, not being Irish and all, but are you seriously trying to tell me that life in an open EU democracy is akin to life in a Soviet satellite state.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMas for freedom of speech.. this forum is as near as you'll get to it and even here the wrong type of freedom could land you in court.
I'm not familiar with RoI's laws on defamation and the internet, so i can't comment, I'm afraid.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 02:00:43 PMi too worked in east germany just after the wall came down, what i found was that the people were not that badly off, just envious of what they perceived to be the better life in west germany.
The population of the DDR had less personal wealth, and the state near bankrupted itself trying to improve living standards in the early 80s. But that's not why they had a lower quality of life. If you really don't understand that - if you really think that the Ossis had a similar quality of life in the West, then you're wither deluded, terminally thick, or both.
so having the trappings of wealth indicates a higher standard of living...eg people who drive a bmw or a merc are happier because?? my father reared 9 of us on a small farm we had no phone, we had an old car, we got an education til we were 16. neither of my parents went to work other than farming my father bought two neighbouring small farms and paid for them without going to the bank. for my part i work 6days, mrs lawn works 5 days we struggle with our bills with 3 kids we need two cars and we have a phone. to my way of thinking my father had a better life than I'm having. he ceiled 4 nights a week and never missed a wake. i haven't time to take the kids to football. i bought into the American dream so to speak i built a house and got a mortgage by the time its paid for it will need gutted. that 2nd loan will see me into my retirement without a penny. should i have the misfortune to live much longer than that I'll have to sell the home I've worked for to pay for my old age leaving my children sweet nothing I'll bet that over half the posters on this forum can tell a similar story. some dream ::)
What...your father owned land :o
Thankfully Stalin wiped out kulak's like you. We don't want class enemy landowners like you polluting the revolution when it comes.
did you actually read this? the point is that on the face if it with my modern home and two cars and perceived better life. i should have an idyllic lifestyle when in fact my working week is getting longer and longer just to make ends meet. also that now that same land couldnt even support one person. tell me thats progress
there is another little problem for america, stats reveal that the hispanic population in the US is exploding and that by 2030 they could be 40% of the total population. these people are typically low paid or employed and decendents of the very people who have in the past favoured marxists politics. it will be very interesting for those who are still around at that time to see how english speaking white american capitalists try to sell the american dream to folk who have very little to dream about but can still vote.
Quote from: 4father on December 26, 2011, 11:07:32 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 04:29:23 AM
Quote from: 4father on December 25, 2011, 12:38:47 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 25, 2011, 12:08:27 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 10:11:27 PM
minder we had a democratic change of government here less than a year ago we changed leaders.. nothing has changed.
Time to install the Sinn Féin Peoples Politburo to put us on the straight and narrow.
Trust me, the Monster Raving Looney party would be more trusted than Fine Gael.
They still got a lot more votes than the Shinners in the G.E.
If an election was held tomorrow, do you believe FG would still win?
I am pretty sure FG would emege with most seats. They would still be able to establish a much smaller majority govenment with Labour. It was enevitable that FG and Labour's populaity would dip once they had to make the tough decisions.
Do you really believe that if by some very unlikely circumstance that SF led the Irish Govenment that its support would not drop once it had to make the tough decisions. It may choose different decisions but its support would dip. SF could be populist and increase its share for the shorterm, but the following year when we became Europes Zimbabwee, that support would vanish entirely. Of course they probably would just remove the Dáil and let the Army Council run the country.
why? why do sinn feins properly costed plans automatically lead ireland to a worse place? how do you know this mayo? why does making those who can pay more pay more lead to ruin. why does reducing the wages of top civil servants lead to ruin what are they going to do? emmigrate? so what?
Quote from: Ulick on December 24, 2011, 01:30:02 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on December 24, 2011, 12:02:41 PM
Ulick, instead of coming across as snidey, why don't you just tell us what 'real communism' is?
Wobbler I've had this debate on here before and I just find the ignorance of the concept tiresome. The Internet is full of wonderful informative resources nowadays, if someone wants to seriously debate a topic the least they could do is firstly go off and familiarize themselves with it before compounding the ignorance. Here's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
Translation: "I can't be bothered backing up my point so I want you to go off, do the research for me and post it here on my behalf." Sorry, but you are the one trying to argue that Soviet Russia wasn't Communist, the burden of proof is on you to back up that point, not me.
Quote
To say that Russia or the Soviet Union was communist is as nonsensical to saying NI is a republic because Sinn Féin are in government.
If SF were the only party in the north and all other parties were banned then you might have some sort of analogy.
Quotedid you actually read this? the point is that on the face if it with my modern home and two cars and perceived better life. i should have an idyllic lifestyle when in fact my working week is getting longer and longer just to make ends meet. also that now that same land couldnt even support one person. tell me thats progress
Yes, I read it. It is a self-pitying, whinging pile of shit.
You still have a job, you still have your house. You DO have that "perceived" better life that many others have lost (and that you could never have even in the most utopian realization of this communist state you long for). What you need, lad, is a good kick up the hole.
I think more than him needs a kick in the hole. ;)
Quote from: mannix on December 26, 2011, 08:20:22 PM
I think more than him needs a kick in the hole. ;)
Well, me auld sleeveen..... are you still over there in New York smiling in the Yanks faces and then whinging about them as soon as they have their backs turned ?
Quote from: lawnseed on December 26, 2011, 01:25:09 PM
the point is that on the face if it with my modern home and two cars and perceived better life. i should have an idyllic lifestyle when in fact my working week is getting longer and longer just to make ends meet. also that now that same land couldnt even support one person. tell me thats progress
Play me the world's smallest violin. You're like Padraig Flynn moaning about the cost of running two houses (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8T0Q03oJSc).
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 10:11:27 PM
minder we had a democratic change of government here less than a year ago we changed leaders.. nothing has changed.
the results of a health survey carried out on two work forces one in India and one in china(same company) who gained access to the western diet eg fast food and precooked meals because they were working for western companies were so bad that the Chinese government refused to let the survey continue. in India 40% of the workers surveyed were showing signs of type 2. diabetes in India has historically been amongst the lowest on earth.
Oh boy. Newly developed countries now suffering from the same problems that the rest of the developed world suffers from? Well we'd better wind the clock back and put them back into poverty then. Better to suffer from malnutrition and have high infant mortality than to put up with diabetes and obesity, what?
Quotewhat I'm driving at is that i believe we are being farmed like cattle here in the 'free west' and basically we are no more free than the countries we c**k a snook at. i think that America fears communism because its run by huge businesses who fund/buy the politicians they want to do the business for them. eg George bush during his oil industry funded regime. he by his criminal actions cause the price of oil to treble he was actually a great president for those who paid to keep him there. obamas campaign was funded by the pharmaceutical industry- changes to health regulations have seen billions pour into their bank accounts. under communist governance these huge organisations would be nationalised and come under the ownership of the state rendering them powerless to control. i think these outfits see the appeal of communism to the ordinary man and it scares the shiet out of them.
Yeah, right. Nationalized industry would be so much better, wouldn't it? Remind me again of how content the workers were at British Leyland when it was nationalized? How good were their products? That's right, their cars were shite and the workers were always on strike.
Your problem with private corporate governance seems to be that it puts corporations under the control of a small number of people. Here is the news. Nationalized companies are still under the control of a small number of people. The difference is that private companies are accountable to shareholders. Nationalized companies are a law onto themselves by comparison since they only have one shareholder, namely the government.
;D nice to see a mayo man getting under a Kerry mans skin. Actually going snowboarding tomorrow with a bunch of yanks in vermont. You seem to be confusing my dislike for military intervention where it's not needed or warranted with a disliking of the country, and a lot of the natives here have similar views and I have lived here on and off for 20 years so I am well qualified to express a fairly informed opinion.
I am still glad I was born and reared in Ireland, and I defend it to anyone that cares to put it down, even to some of the more Americanized Irish born lads that call it names and run it down despite it being their homeland.
Off out for pint so goodnight and chill :-*.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 26, 2011, 01:43:35 PM
there is another little problem for america, stats reveal that the hispanic population in the US is exploding and that by 2030 they could be 40% of the total population. these people are typically low paid or employed and decendents of the very people who have in the past favoured marxists politics. it will be very interesting for those who are still around at that time to see how english speaking white american capitalists try to sell the american dream to folk who have very little to dream about but can still vote.
Have a think about what you've written here. You could make an argument that NAFTA has added to poverty in Mexico, or that US drug consumption adds to the current state of chaos there. But those aside there's a reason people have and continue to emigrate to the USA.
You think in 2030 he decendents of current Latino immigrants will still be working low wage jobs? The history of immigrants would tell you otherwise. They'll be educated, working better jobs than their parents and forming a powerful voting block. I think myself they'll be great for health of the country.
Quote from: Ulick on December 23, 2011, 11:38:53 PM
The problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails.
Woooooooh!
Let me guess, all critics of communism have been successfully discredited by you?
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 26, 2011, 07:29:01 PM
Quotedid you actually read this? the point is that on the face if it with my modern home and two cars and perceived better life. i should have an idyllic lifestyle when in fact my working week is getting longer and longer just to make ends meet. also that now that same land couldnt even support one person. tell me thats progress
Yes, I read it. It is a self-pitying, whinging pile of shit.
You still have a job, you still have your house. You DO have that "perceived" better life that many others have lost (and that you could never have even in the most utopian realization of this communist state you long for). What you need, lad, is a good kick up the hole.
you have't read this thread at all, have you? i suggest you start at page 1. keep the word 'sustainability' somewhere in your head. what i'm saying is that the boom bust, up down, rich poor, lets fight over the last wee drop of oil last 100 years isnt sustainable. it will end because it has to. we need a more sustainable system of governance. ffs the banks are broke! they're the places capitalists put their money. it hasnt worked. btw you may have heard of the 99 movement. they are the fast growing protest group in the US the 99 meaning 1% of americans have 99% of the wealth. i suppose they all need a kick up the hole ;)
Quote from: muppet on December 27, 2011, 12:47:15 PM
Quote from: Ulick on December 23, 2011, 11:38:53 PM
The problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails.
Woooooooh!
Let me guess, all critics of communism have been successfully discredited by you?
americas problem with communism.. is... ? stick to the thread just like you capitalists to resort to violence and personal abuse. mccarthyites!!!
Quote from: lawnseed on December 27, 2011, 06:49:52 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 27, 2011, 12:47:15 PM
Quote from: Ulick on December 23, 2011, 11:38:53 PM
The problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails.
Woooooooh!
Let me guess, all critics of communism have been successfully discredited by you?
americas problem with communism.. is... ? stick to the thread just like you capitalists to resort to violence and personal abuse. mccarthyites!!!
That isn't abuse, it is a reference to the stereo-typical response to any criticism from a certain element here. '***' has been discredited therefore cannot be considered. Surely you have seen it before?
As for MacCarthy I doubt if anyone here would defend that sort of lunacy, TO maybe but that would be it.
Now, as an experiment, I suggest you go into a bar popular with Eastern Europeans and shout at the top of your voice how brilliant Communists are. I suspect they know a bit more about it that yourself, myself or Ulick.
Ideal in theory,but does not work in practice.
True Communism, like true Capitalism, would have be implemented without compromise. That could only be done with a strong military hand in both cases.
I wouldn't be optimistic.
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on December 27, 2011, 08:09:08 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 27, 2011, 08:01:53 PM
True Communism, like true Capitalism, would have be implemented without compromise. That could only be done with a strong military hand in both cases.
I wouldn't be optimistic.
And I don't think you are going to find two people who will give the same, detailed ideas of what they consider to be "true" either.
For all it's failings, liberal democracies allow a wide range of political and philosophical ideas to take place within a society and allow counter-culture and non-conformist ideas to happen alongside traditional and predominant traits of the society it is a part of.
Surely the Communist Manifesto is
true communism? It doesn't take a genius to work out that implementing any ideology to its fullest extent is going to be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to achieve so inevitably you get a watered down version.
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on December 27, 2011, 08:09:08 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 27, 2011, 08:01:53 PM
True Communism, like true Capitalism, would have be implemented without compromise. That could only be done with a strong military hand in both cases.
I wouldn't be optimistic.
And I don't think you are going to find two people who will give the same, detailed ideas of what they consider to be "true" either.
For all it's failings, liberal democracies allow a wide range of political and philosophical ideas to take place within a society and allow counter-culture and non-conformist ideas to happen alongside traditional and predominant traits of the society it is a part of.
That is my point. Any definition of
true anything couldn't accommodate any other thinking and would thus have to be without compromise.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 27, 2011, 06:49:52 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 27, 2011, 12:47:15 PM
Quote from: Ulick on December 23, 2011, 11:38:53 PM
The problem with communism and contrary to popular belief it has never been tried. That so many people seem to think that communist states have existed display nothing more than complete ignorance of what it is or entails.
Woooooooh!
Let me guess, all critics of communism have been successfully discredited by you?
americas problem with communism.. is... ? stick to the thread just like you capitalists to resort to violence and personal abuse. mccarthyites!!!
..no, lets examine your tragic situation a bit more first uncle Joe.
How many bedrooms in that house ? what kind of cars do you own and how many acres did the auld lad leave you ?
The proletariat has a right to know !
I think the nearest 'true' communism came to being implemented would have been during the Spanish Revolution, but that didn't last long. It's easy to come to the conclusion that true communism can never work because for progress to take place in any field there needs to be someone in charges, and power can corrupt or taint even hitherto purists. I think the left of the political spectrum is too fractitious and too uncomfortable with compromise for the ideal to be sustainable, unfortunately.
George Orwell's Homage to Catalonia gives a fantastic first hand account of the Spanish Revolution and it's downfall if any of you are interested, it's a pretty short book
Quote from: Buswhacker on December 27, 2011, 07:36:50 PM
Ideal in theory,but does not work in practice.
See so many people hide behind this lazy opinion without understanding it completely. It hasn't been tried for long or hard enough. Socialism relies on international co-operation and it has never been given that opportunity. It was met with fierce resistance by the Capitalist states (I wonder why).
But the main question i always have for people who make that silly statement is 'Does Capitalism work in practice?'. Look around you my friend from Loughguile to Baghdad, Capitalism is the root of all evil.
By the way, Cuba, Venezuala and Bolivia are good examples of Socialism working. Cuba is an example to the nations and islands around it who all suffer from high infant mortality rates, low literacy and numeracy rates, low life expectancy rates while Cuba is up there with the richest so-called developed countries. In Venezuala and Bolivia, you are seeing a class example of Socialism beginning a process of wealth redistribution.
So many people come off with that bullshit about it only working in theory and not in practice. It is a young idea in comparison to capitalism and has never been given the chance to work properly in practice.
I love this argument that all those failed Communist countries were doing it wrong. Does that not apply to those countries who screwed up capitalism?
4father are you seriously saying that we should remodel ourselves as Cuba (GDP per capita <$10,000) or Bolivia (GDP per capita $4,600)?
Quote from: muppet on December 28, 2011, 02:46:43 PM
I love this argument that all those failed Communist countries were doing it wrong. Does that not apply to those countries who screwed up capitalism?
4father are you seriously saying that we should remodel ourselves as Cuba (GDP per capita <$10,000) or Bolivia (GDP per capita $4,600)?
Again, its another lazy analysis. Cuba, Venezuela, and Bolivia are countries who adopted and embraced socialism coming from centuries of cruel ruling classes where poverty, disease, hunger were more common than not. Come on, use your nut.
Cuba, practically a third world country surrounded by islands of mass poverty and hunger like Haiti, Jamaica etc, has a infant mortality rate and life expectancy rate that rivals our own here in Ireland, in the UK, the USA, France etc. It has nothing but its sugar canes to sell but can't because of the embargo imposed on it by the World Trade Organisation (otherwise known as the USA) but still maintains that type of record. Its remarkable for such a poor country. What it has done correctly and why it should be used as an example by Western countries and without a shadow of a doubt our own is that its priorities are in the right place. The first programme for government was a literacy and numeracy one (the same example that Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia have followed).
GDP means nothing when people can barely afford a loaf of bread. The aforementioned countries are coming from a harder place than we are to implement socialism and fairness. In Ireland, we have lots to export, lots of wealth in the country. Imagine if that wealth was distributed properly and equally so that everyone is given the opportunity.
If Socialism was introduced in Ireland and embraced by the people, the GDP would rise significantly and the cost of living would drop. Simple economics.
Quote from: 4father on December 28, 2011, 03:09:45 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 28, 2011, 02:46:43 PM
I love this argument that all those failed Communist countries were doing it wrong. Does that not apply to those countries who screwed up capitalism?
4father are you seriously saying that we should remodel ourselves as Cuba (GDP per capita <$10,000) or Bolivia (GDP per capita $4,600)?
Again, its another lazy analysis. Cuba, Venezuela, and Bolivia are countries who adopted and embraced socialism coming from centuries of cruel ruling classes where poverty, disease, hunger were more common than not. Come on, use your nut.
Cuba, practically a third world country surrounded by islands of mass poverty and hunger like Haiti, Jamaica etc, has a infant mortality rate and life expectancy rate that rivals our own here in Ireland, in the UK, the USA, France etc. It has nothing but its sugar canes to sell but can't because of the embargo imposed on it by the World Trade Organisation (otherwise known as the USA) but still maintains that type of record. Its remarkable for such a poor country. What it has done correctly and why it should be used as an example by Western countries and without a shadow of a doubt our own is that its priorities are in the right place. The first programme for government was a literacy and numeracy one (the same example that Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia have followed).
GDP means nothing when people can barely afford a loaf of bread. The aforementioned countries are coming from a harder place than we are to implement socialism and fairness. In Ireland, we have lots to export, lots of wealth in the country. Imagine if that wealth was distributed properly and equally so that everyone is given the opportunity.
If Socialism was introduced in Ireland and embraced by the people, the GDP would rise significantly and the cost of living would drop. Simple economics.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Everything you described in those countries was far worse worse here. Come on, use your nut!
We now (despite everything) have a GDP of >$40,000. You think Communism would raise that? Cuba has more natural resources than we have (the great gas giveaway accepted) and they haven't raised their GDP.
And you called my analysis lazy. You need to read more and listen to the bar stool experts less.
Here is a question for the Commies:
In Ireland the Left always fights for more dole, expenses etc for the unemployed. Fair enough. In Communist countries there is no unemployed. Much as most of us dislike it, people can choose to remain unemployed here. That doesn't apply in Communism.
Q: How do you make the unemployed work when they don't want to?
Quote from: muppet on December 28, 2011, 03:21:10 PM
Here is a question for the Commies:
In Ireland the Left always fights for more dole, expenses etc for the unemployed. Fair enough. In Communist countries there is no unemployed. Much as most of us dislike it, people can choose to remain unemployed here. That doesn't apply in Communism.
Q: How do you make the unemployed work when they don't want to?
With truncheons and big sticks. If they don't comply you make them disappear. Problem solved.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 28, 2011, 03:25:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 28, 2011, 03:21:10 PM
Here is a question for the Commies:
In Ireland the Left always fights for more dole, expenses etc for the unemployed. Fair enough. In Communist countries there is no unemployed. Much as most of us dislike it, people can choose to remain unemployed here. That doesn't apply in Communism.
Q: How do you make the unemployed work when they don't want to?
With truncheons and big sticks. If they don't comply you make them disappear. Problem solved.
Seen them to the Gulags out on Cooley.
"How do you make the unemployed work when they don't want to?"
In Ireland there are generations of families who have never worked a day in their lifes.
Limit the period of unemployment benefit; pencil in a clause to cover exceptional circumstances, and I'd think 2 years would be more than enough to find a job.
Are there jobs in Ireland today? Yep, but they may be in hot food bars or as shop assistants, but they are still jobs
Quote from: ardal on December 28, 2011, 07:54:26 PM
"Are there jobs in Ireland today? Yep, but they may be in hot food bars or as shop assistants, but they are still jobs
Will you take up one of those jobs ? ::)
Quote from: ardal on December 28, 2011, 07:54:26 PM
"How do you make the unemployed work when they don't want to?"
In Ireland there are generations of families who have never worked a day in their lifes.
Limit the period of unemployment benefit; pencil in a clause to cover exceptional circumstances, and I'd think 2 years would be more than enough to find a job.
Are there jobs in Ireland today? Yep, but they may be in hot food bars or as shop assistants, but they are still jobs
Yes but the overwhealming majority of those on the dole in the Republic (and perhaps the North too, not as informed about the situation) now are relatively new to this situation, there are thousands and thousands more who have emmigated, returned to training or education who worked all or most of their lives too.
Quote from: Rossfan on December 28, 2011, 07:55:42 PM
Quote from: ardal on December 28, 2011, 07:54:26 PM
"Are there jobs in Ireland today? Yep, but they may be in hot food bars or as shop assistants, but they are still jobs
Will you take up one of those jobs ? ::)
I've worked plenty of shit jobs while getting educated and to tide me over while trying to find a good job. Fit and able people should not be getting all their income from the dole for years on end.
Quote from: muppet on December 28, 2011, 02:46:43 PM
I love this argument that all those failed Communist countries were doing it wrong. Does that not apply to those countries who screwed up capitalism?
4father are you seriously saying that we should remodel ourselves as Cuba (GDP per capita <$10,000) or Bolivia (GDP per capita $4,600)?
muppet can i just take you back to the cuban case. you are correct cubas gdp is low but they have been isolated and at the mercy of the yanks for over 30 years and we know what that means- dirty tricks and subversion ala honduras panama haiti etc... also in the sixties and seventies the yanks regulary threatened cubas neighbours with nuclear attack. given that most american hospitals rely heavily on cuban trained doctors from agencies i'd say they're not doing too badly your healths your wealth etc.. infact in alot of cases it would be cheaper for us to send our sick over to cuba to have them treated we could throw in a relative or two and still be cheaper and quicker than paying irish consultants and i can tell you that cuban hospitals arent closed with the winter vomiting bug. in fact i've suggested it to our health minister in a letter recently when it was pointed out how nordies were being jumped up the queue in priivate hospitals in dublin at the taxpayers expense for heart operations and our southern brothers were dying for the want of treatment while operating theatres here are mothballed. i suggest you see the docudrama 'sicko' for an insight. btw cuba i hear is very good for holidays ;)
Quote from: muppet on December 28, 2011, 03:14:30 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 28, 2011, 03:09:45 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 28, 2011, 02:46:43 PM
I love this argument that all those failed Communist countries were doing it wrong. Does that not apply to those countries who screwed up capitalism?
4father are you seriously saying that we should remodel ourselves as Cuba (GDP per capita <$10,000) or Bolivia (GDP per capita $4,600)?
Again, its another lazy analysis. Cuba, Venezuela, and Bolivia are countries who adopted and embraced socialism coming from centuries of cruel ruling classes where poverty, disease, hunger were more common than not. Come on, use your nut.
Cuba, practically a third world country surrounded by islands of mass poverty and hunger like Haiti, Jamaica etc, has a infant mortality rate and life expectancy rate that rivals our own here in Ireland, in the UK, the USA, France etc. It has nothing but its sugar canes to sell but can't because of the embargo imposed on it by the World Trade Organisation (otherwise known as the USA) but still maintains that type of record. Its remarkable for such a poor country. What it has done correctly and why it should be used as an example by Western countries and without a shadow of a doubt our own is that its priorities are in the right place. The first programme for government was a literacy and numeracy one (the same example that Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia have followed).
GDP means nothing when people can barely afford a loaf of bread. The aforementioned countries are coming from a harder place than we are to implement socialism and fairness. In Ireland, we have lots to export, lots of wealth in the country. Imagine if that wealth was distributed properly and equally so that everyone is given the opportunity.
If Socialism was introduced in Ireland and embraced by the people, the GDP would rise significantly and the cost of living would drop. Simple economics.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Everything you described in those countries was far worse worse here. Come on, use your nut!
We now (despite everything) have a GDP of >$40,000. You think Communism would raise that? Cuba has more natural resources than we have (the great gas giveaway accepted) and they haven't raised their GDP.
And you called my analysis lazy. You need to read more and listen to the bar stool experts less.
This is getting ridiculous. Have you any idea of the poverty ans living conditions that existed in Bolivia or Cuba pre socialism? Obviously not. But poverty is relative anyway. It still exists here.
You are so obsessed with GDP as a means to assess the wealth of a nation. Its a mean sum. So for every millionaire in Ireland, there are thousands on the dole or earning much much less than the average GDP. I know you know this but most people dont earn 40,000 in Ireland! Come on, use your nut.
There is no comparison between Cuba and Ireland. One has nothing and has an embargo on it which limits its trade greatly but still, through prioritising the people before the profit, manages to maintain health rates that rival the developed countries in the world and have an unemployment rate of 0%. The other is in the EU and is committed through the hard work of its working people to pay a crowd of bankers while hospitals close, dole ques get longer, schools are told that their budgets are going to take a hit and the underclasses, created by the state, are going to be blamed. You mentioned for me the vast amount of natural resources 'given' away to shell that, had it been nationalised, would have funded the Irish economy as it was 3 years ago 90 times over!! There really is no comparison. Its all about whether a nation and its people cares enough about its people or not. Socialism is the only solution that involves real equality. The founding fathers of our nation believed it too. Read the proclamation and the democratic programme of the first Dáil. Its all in there, black and white and bloodstained.
Maybe other eejits ill listen to you on your barstool, this eejit will choose to challenge lazy comment for fear it might influence others who might be feling the pinch and looking to blame the junkies and the single parents.
i think everyones perception of communism is thousands of people in paddy fields planting rice in little grey uniforms. with modern methods of gauging public opinion and technology decisions can be made quickly and easily. eg who do you want for president text a b or c only one vote from each phone you would even have to stop work/play so problems with planning on a mass scale could be minimised. given that the worlds population is still growing there are never going to be enough jobs to create full employment so underclasses are as fiontan says unavoidable. so perhaps some kind of jobsharing week on week off could be a runner, the time off could be spent doing voluntary work or playing sports. the wage for being off the same as for working.
somethings gotta give..
Quote from: Maiden1 on December 28, 2011, 11:41:15 PM
Despite suffering a trade embargo for the past 50 years, Cuba has more doctors per head of population than any other nation in the world. In all recent surveys it also has one of the most happy and contentent populations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Planet_Index
In Venezuela where the oil industry has been nationalised (red oil) everyone in the country benefits from it instead of a very small percentage who benefited before it was nationalised. In Ireland we have Shell to Sea giving away Irelands oil reserves as well as private companies building toll roads that pay for themselves within 10 years which then generate massive profits for private individuals instead of the profits being used to e.g. build more roads.
I do not agree with Communism where Communism means everyone working for virtually nothing while Nicolae Ceauescu or Stalin etc. lived oppulent lives, where Communism is in effect a form of cheap labour.
Or as George Orwell put it in animal farm 'Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer — except, of course, for the pigs and the dogs.'
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7d/Pig_roastbeef.jpg/144px-Pig_roastbeef.jpg)
I do not think it is morally right that anyone in the world has 40 Billion dollars in there bank account (or 1 Billion dollars for that matter) while other people are starving, I don't care if they are Warren Buffett or Carlos Slim or Bono. I'm not saying I agree with Communism where no one has any real personal incentive to improve themselves but with the type of Hypercapitalism we have in the western world at the minute the rich are getting much richer and the poor getting much poorer.
nice post. 50 YEARS :o of the yank boot on their necks fair play to them
Lawnseed, I think its time we brought this argument to the next level.
First, I dont see how you really need two cars ...?..surely the wifey and yourself can arrange things whereby your activities are coordinated ?
Also, as well as being morally wrong to be living in a house that you have not paid for with your own money, is it not unfair that you benefit from a favoured position with the bank when so many others have lost their homes or are simply paying rent.
Finally, there are people, especially in urban areas, who have never had land in their family...how can you justify living off the fat of the land when the workers create product which they have no ownership of ?
I wouldnt be an expert at these sort of things but it should be quite easy to set up a paypal account where we can redistribute your wealth.
Maiden1, 4father...I'm sure you would support this effort ? Do either of you have experience setting up paypal accounts....Dont you agree that the principled thing to do is practice what you preach before expecting the rest of society to follow.
Quote from: lawnseed on December 28, 2011, 11:45:58 PM
Quote from: Maiden1 on December 28, 2011, 11:41:15 PM
Despite suffering a trade embargo for the past 50 years, Cuba has more doctors per head of population than any other nation in the world. In all recent surveys it also has one of the most happy and contentent populations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Planet_Index
In Venezuela where the oil industry has been nationalised (red oil) everyone in the country benefits from it instead of a very small percentage who benefited before it was nationalised. In Ireland we have Shell to Sea giving away Irelands oil reserves as well as private companies building toll roads that pay for themselves within 10 years which then generate massive profits for private individuals instead of the profits being used to e.g. build more roads.
I do not agree with Communism where Communism means everyone working for virtually nothing while Nicolae Ceauescu or Stalin etc. lived oppulent lives, where Communism is in effect a form of cheap labour.
Or as George Orwell put it in animal farm 'Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer — except, of course, for the pigs and the dogs.'
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7d/Pig_roastbeef.jpg/144px-Pig_roastbeef.jpg)
I do not think it is morally right that anyone in the world has 40 Billion dollars in there bank account (or 1 Billion dollars for that matter) while other people are starving, I don't care if they are Warren Buffett or Carlos Slim or Bono. I'm not saying I agree with Communism where no one has any real personal incentive to improve themselves but with the type of Hypercapitalism we have in the western world at the minute the rich are getting much richer and the poor getting much poorer.
nice post. 50 YEARS :o of the yank boot on their necks fair play to them
Indeed! Good post maiden1
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 29, 2011, 12:19:26 AM
I wouldnt be an expert at these sort of things...
Clearly.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 12:31:03 AM
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 29, 2011, 12:19:26 AM
I wouldnt be an expert at these sort of things...
Clearly.
Is that a Loughguile native on the left of your avatar progressing to a Glensman on the right?
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 29, 2011, 12:47:02 AM
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 12:31:03 AM
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 29, 2011, 12:19:26 AM
I wouldnt be an expert at these sort of things...
Clearly.
Is that a Loughguile native on the left of your avatar progressing to a Glensman on the right?
Hahaha, I'll let the North Antrim folk fight that one out.
Quote from: Maiden1 on December 29, 2011, 12:31:47 AM
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 29, 2011, 12:19:26 AM
Lawnseed, I think its time we brought this argument to the next level.
First, I dont see how you really need two cars ...?..surely the wifey and yourself can arrange things whereby your activities are coordinated ?
Also, as well as being morally wrong to be living in a house that you have not paid for with your own money, is it not unfair that you benefit from a favoured position with the bank when so many others have lost their homes or are simply paying rent.
Finally, there are people, especially in urban areas, who have never had land in their family...how can you justify living off the fat of the land when the workers create product which they have no ownership of ?
I wouldnt be an expert at these sort of things but it should be quite easy to set of a paypal account where we can redistribute your wealth.
Maiden1, 4father...I'm sure you would support this effort ? Do either of you have experience setting up paypal accounts....Dont you agree that the principled thing to do is practice what you preach before expecting the rest of society to follow.
Aye go for it, if they cancel my mortgage they can redistribute away :). Not sure me redistrubuting my wealth would kick off much of a revolution.
Don't you think its morally wrong for you to be living in a house worth, wild guess, 150,000-200000 that you havent even paid for while some people live in slums made out of cardboard ?
Sounds like Tralee's away to f**k altogether!!
It seems that thousands of Communist Cubans are taking up European Union Spain's offer of taking up passports.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16342340
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 29, 2011, 10:59:51 AM
It seems that thousands of Communist Cubans are taking up European Union Spain's offer of taking up passports.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16342340
Why would they not take up the option of citizenship that they are entitled to?
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 11:18:23 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 29, 2011, 10:59:51 AM
It seems that thousands of Communist Cubans are taking up European Union Spain's offer of taking up passports.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16342340
Why would they not take up the option of citizenship that they are entitled to?
So they can leave the Communist Paradise..
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 29, 2011, 11:47:33 AM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 11:18:23 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 29, 2011, 10:59:51 AM
It seems that thousands of Communist Cubans are taking up European Union Spain's offer of taking up passports.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16342340
Why would they not take up the option of citizenship that they are entitled to?
So they can leave the Communist Paradise..
And the other nationalities?
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 09:40:34 PM
my father reared 9 of us on a small farm we had no phone, we had an old car, we got an education til we were 16. neither of my parents went to work other than farming my father bought two neighbouring small farms and paid for them without going to the bank.
Your father managed to buy two farms without a loan? At the same time as paying for a family of nine? And had a car? And the only real sacrafice was doing without a phone? What were you farming?
[quote author=4father link=topic=20858.msg1060866#msg1060866 date=1325111821
This is getting ridiculous. Have you any idea of the poverty ans living conditions that existed in Bolivia or Cuba pre socialism? Obviously not.
[/quote]
Are you seriously trying to argue that Cuban and Bolivian poverty was historically worse than Irish poverty?
1,000,000 out of 8,000,000 died between 1845 and 1849?
Non of the pro-Communists attempted to answer my question. That question is one of the reasons why there will never be communism in an educated country without an oppressive military.
Ah Muppet, the old classic duck and cover. Ignore most of a post because you don't know anything about contemporary Socialism. I know all about poverty in Ireland. Let me spell it out for you clearly. Poverty, hunger and disease were rife in Ireland and still exist in our poorest area's and that is a crime. On the whole, the contemporary health rates in Ireland are still quite good although I expect this to fall. In Bolivia up until 2006, the Bolivian people were never on the priority list of the government. Morales with his reforms has risen the literacy and numeracy rate significantly in 5 years. Bolivia were always the poorest country in Latin America and its health rates (how a Nation should be judged on) matched this. 75% of people living in El Alto in Bolivia survived on less than $2 a day. Bolivia was notorious for the most unequal wealth distribution in Latin America. The richest 20% of Bolivia's population had an income 41 times more than the poorest 20%. (Ireland has also a very poor ratio). British Gas, Exxon and other gas and oil countries raped the country. Since election, Evo Morales has nationalised all of the countries resources and is now redistributing it. He has only had 5 years at it so far. Imagine if these policies were in place for centuries the way capitalist policies were.
But I ask you a question. Is the current system we have in Ireland fair. On the macro, is it fair that most of the world live in complete poverty and starve while the West pile up butter mountains and lakes of milk to keep the prices high for the markets? This is called capitalism and it has certainly proven not to work.
What are you on? The most oppressive military's of the world exist in the non-communist countries not to mention that most are police states. Do you really know anything? I think I would like the 30 mins back of my life that I have spent trying to teach you. At first, I thought you were lazy. Then I thought you were just ignorant or a sap to the Western media believing everything you read in the Independent. Now I just think you are stupid and I feel sorry for you.
What is the difference between Socialism and Communism?
This an honest question. Is communism the bastardisation of Socialism to gain and hold on to power? This is what happened in Cuba and fortunately does not seem to have happened in Bolivia. Can't say Venezuela as Chavez was trying to make himself president for life.
It's obvious that if you want to make waves in the boxing world, communism is the way forward. Ivan Drago and Teófilo Stevenson were the best I've ever seen. I can't help but think that if Ireland had turned communist around the 80s then Barry McGuigan, Ray Close and Dave Boy McAuley would be spoken in the same breath as Rocky, Jack Johnson and Cassius Clay.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 02:09:19 PM
Ah Muppet, the old classic duck and cover. Ignore most of a post because you don't know anything about contemporary Socialism. I know all about poverty in Ireland. Let me spell it out for you clearly. Poverty, hunger and disease were rife in Ireland and still exist in our poorest area's and that is a crime. On the whole, the contemporary health rates in Ireland are still quite good although I expect this to fall. In Bolivia up until 2006, the Bolivian people were never on the priority list of the government. Morales with his reforms has risen the literacy and numeracy rate significantly in 5 years. Bolivia were always the poorest country in Latin America and its health rates (how a Nation should be judged on) matched this. 75% of people living in El Alto in Bolivia survived on less than $2 a day. Bolivia was notorious for the most unequal wealth distribution in Latin America. The richest 20% of Bolivia's population had an income 41 times more than the poorest 20%. (Ireland has also a very poor ratio). British Gas, Exxon and other gas and oil countries raped the country. Since election, Evo Morales has nationalised all of the countries resources and is now redistributing it. He has only had 5 years at it so far. Imagine if these policies were in place for centuries the way capitalist policies were.
But I ask you a question. Is the current system we have in Ireland fair. On the macro, is it fair that most of the world live in complete poverty and starve while the West pile up butter mountains and lakes of milk to keep the prices high for the markets? This is called capitalism and it has certainly proven not to work.
What are you on? The most oppressive military's of the world exist in the non-communist countries not to mention that most are police states. Do you really know anything? I think I would like the 30 mins back of my life that I have spent trying to teach you. At first, I thought you were lazy. Then I thought you were just ignorant or a sap to the Western media believing everything you read in the Independent. Now I just think you are stupid and I feel sorry for you.
:D :D :D :D :D
Good man youself. You'll make an excellent Communist.
As for your points on Bolivia, nothing there was worse than what we had was it?
The most oppressive militaries were not Communism? And you call me stupid. Stalin killed 30,000,000 of his own people and that is before you count his love of foreigners.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 02:40:30 PM
As for your points on Bolivia, nothing there was worse than what we had was it?
Proof that you are stupid and cannot read my reply to this question. Well done stupid.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 02:40:30 PM
The most oppressive militaries were not Communism? And you call me stupid. Stalin killed 30,000,000 of his own people and that is before you count his love of foreigners.
Hitler killed millions. The yanks have killed and are killing hundreds of thousands, probably millions. The dropped fuckin atom bombs ffs. The Brits destroyed Africa. The Spanish and Portuguese destroyed South America. The french were b**tards everywhere they went. Even the Belgians and the Dutch got stuck in and don't start me on those fuckin Vikings.
This seems to be the gist of your argument:
Anyone who isn't a Communist is a rabid Capitalist.
Any bad regime which isn't Communist proves Communism is right
Any bad regime which is Communist wasn't doing it right and must be omitted from any debate
Our history is irrelevant but Bolivia's history is crucial
The fact that people on the dole here make more money than the average Bolivian worker is irrelevant
Any non-Communist opinion is irrelevant
Resistance is futile.............
Once again, your failure to read is remarkable for someone who writes so much tripe. This is the point where I say, why did I bother?
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Anyone who isn't a Communist is a rabid Capitalist.
Not true. Most people are apathetic and aren't 'anything' and therefore unfortunately ignorant to what could be for the masses. Those who exploit through landlordism and cheap labour etc. are bad, greedy, immoral and probably rabid.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Any bad regime which isn't Communist proves Communism is right
Any bad regime which is Communist wasn't doing it right and must be omitted from any debate
First point, it doesn't prove that communism is 'right'. But why wouldn't you want to fix bad regimes with a much better and fairer one? Tumble weeds flew past when I read that one.
Second point. Some states tried to do it and done it badly. Some were met with so much resistance that they collapsed. Some were only communist states in name only. But tell me one place where Capitalism works. (You have failed to answer that question in ANY of your replies to me).
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Our history is irrelevant but Bolivia's history is crucial
The fact that people on the dole here make more money than the average Bolivian worker is irrelevant
Our history is totally relevant as is Bolivia's but they cannot be compared. I have answered this a few times but you are too lazy or too stupid to read or understand it. Poverty is relative. Its not about how much you earn, its about your health and the health of others around you. Its about where the state places the people in terms of its priorities. If someone in Cuba has free health care, free education, a job, a home, food and secure in the thought that they will live and be cared for until 78.8 years (approx ;D) but earns $10 per day. Does that person have more or less than an old person here on the dole who has to choose to be warm or to eat and if they want looked after must be lucky to have a caring family or money to go to a care home but who might have an income of $30 per day? Who is more free and liberated? Does the income matter? Or is wealth based on material things like cars and clothes and Gucci handbags to you? Only stupid people think that.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Any non-Communist opinion is irrelevant
Resistance is futile.............
You are stupid.
Have a look at this: http://www.indexmundi.com/cuba/demographics_profile.html Not bad for a third world country with nothing. And then have a look at its close neighbour in Haiti: http://www.indexmundi.com/haiti/demographics_profile.html
Of particular note are the life expectancy rates and literacy rates. The difference is down to the political systems in place and the exploitation by companies. Remember, Cuba kicked out the United Fruit Company of the USA as well as the other oil and gas companies as did Venezuela and Bolivia. They use their resources for their people. Ireland gave ours away to Shell but you like that type of system don't you?
Any Communist who compares Ireland with Bolivia is right
Anyone else who compares Ireland with Bolivia is stupid as they can't be compared
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 04:26:18 PM
Any Communist who compares Ireland with Bolivia is right
Anyone else who compares Ireland with Bolivia is stupid as they can't be compared
Failed to answer any questions yet again with lazy and stupid comments. You really are stupid.
Anyway, the statistics don't lie. I'm done and dusted with this imbecile.
But just a bit of reading for you. This is what the forefathers of our nation signed up to. I wonder what they would think of people like you and your buddies in Shell and the brown envelope culture and the banks and unemployment and the immigration and the homeless... But of course, Connolly, Pearse, Clarke et all were raving commie lunatics weren't they who could never have brought about change. I highlighted and underlined the important parts for you because i know you don't like reading.
We declare in the words of the Irish Republican Proclamation the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies to be indefeasible, and in the language of our first President. Pádraíg Mac Phiarais, we declare that the Nation's sovereignty extends not only to all men and women of the Nation, but to all its material possessions, the Nation's soil and all its resources, all the wealth and all the wealth-producing processes within the Nation, and with him we reaffirm that all right to private property must be subordinated to the public right and welfare.
We declare that we desire our country to be ruled in accordance with the principles of Liberty, Equality, and Justice for all, which alone can secure permanence of Government in the willing adhesion of the people.
We affirm the duty of every man and woman to give allegiance and service to the Commonwealth, and declare it is the duty of the Nation to assure that every citizen shall have opportunity to spend his or her strength and faculties in the service of the people. In return for willing service, we, in the name of the Republic, declare the right of every citizen to an adequate share of the produce of the Nation's labour.
It shall be the first duty of the Government of the Republic to make provision for the physical, mental and spiritual well-being of the children, to secure that no child shall suffer hunger or cold from lack of food, clothing, or shelter, but that all shall be provided with the means and facilities requisite for their proper education and training as Citizens of a Free and Gaelic Ireland.
The Irish Republic fully realises the necessity of abolishing the present odious, degrading and foreign Poor Law System, substituting therefor a sympathetic native scheme for the care of the Nation's aged and infirm, who shall not be regarded as a burden, but rather entitled to the Nation's gratitude and consideration. Likewise it shall be the duty of the Republic to take such measures as will safeguard the health of the people and ensure the physical as well as the moral well-being of the Nation.
It shall be our duty to promote the development of the Nation's resources, to increase the productivity of its soil, to exploit its mineral deposits, peat bogs, and fisheries, its waterways and harbours, in the interests and for the benefit of the Irish people.
It shall be the duty of the Republic to adopt all measures necessary for the recreation and invigoration of our Industries, and to ensure their being developed on the most beneficial and progressive co-operative and industrial lines. With the adoption of an extensive Irish Consular Service, trade with foreign Nations shall be revived on terms of mutual advantage and goodwill, and while undertaking the organisation of the Nation's trade, import and export, it shall be the duty of the Republic to prevent the shipment from Ireland of food and other necessaries until the wants of the Irish people are fully satisfied and the future provided for.
It shall also devolve upon the National Government to seek co-operation of the Governments of other countries in determining a standard of Social and Industrial Legislation with a view to a general and lasting improvement in the conditions under which the working classes live and labour.
(http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/o/r/o/Philip-J-Orourke/PHOTO/0008photo.jpg)
" I wonder what they would think of people like you and your buddies in Shell"
I have spent years on this forum lambasting Shell, the Indo and the Banks but of course are of a higher intellect and can see that my constant criticism was in fact support, presumably as I am not a Communist. Your assumptions about me are as almost as absurd as your arguments for Communism.
Then you publish a proclamation of political promises, by a self appointed unelected Government, that failed, as some form of final proof that Communism works. Bravo. That was a stroke of genius and unequivocally proves the Communism case.
Ah but you see, in terms of Shell, that is the capitalist system at work. That's how it works. Private companies exploit other Nations' resources for gain. You can't argue against it and then argue for it at the same time. That's just, well... STUPID.
The proclamation was the basis that inspired the Democratic programme. The democratic programme was used as the manifesto for Sinn Féin who landslided to victory in the 1918 election.
And just on your last point and I can't believe I'm having to repeat this same question again. Can you please explain a case for capitalism?
Voting with their feet.
When people try to climb over walls and barbed wire fences, or try to cross the sea in home made rafts all to escape the country they are in, then the government system that they have can't be all that great.
When there are high rates of immigrants into a country then the government is probably doing something right.
Whatever the flaws of the Celtic Tiger, it produced an environment that people wanted to come to, not escape from. Generally free market/capitalist countries have people trying to get in.
On the other hand, attempts at Communism have more often caused people to want to escape it.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 04:20:31 PM
Once again, your failure to read is remarkable for someone who writes so much tripe. This is the point where I say, why did I bother?
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Anyone who isn't a Communist is a rabid Capitalist.
Not true. Most people are apathetic and aren't 'anything' and therefore unfortunately ignorant to what could be for the masses. Those who exploit through landlordism and cheap labour etc. are bad, greedy, immoral and probably rabid.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Any bad regime which isn't Communist proves Communism is right
Any bad regime which is Communist wasn't doing it right and must be omitted from any debate
First point, it doesn't prove that communism is 'right'. But why wouldn't you want to fix bad regimes with a much better and fairer one? Tumble weeds flew past when I read that one.
Second point. Some states tried to do it and done it badly. Some were met with so much resistance that they collapsed. Some were only communist states in name only. But tell me one place where Capitalism works. (You have failed to answer that question in ANY of your replies to me).
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Our history is irrelevant but Bolivia's history is crucial
The fact that people on the dole here make more money than the average Bolivian worker is irrelevant
Our history is totally relevant as is Bolivia's but they cannot be compared. I have answered this a few times but you are too lazy or too stupid to read or understand it. Poverty is relative. Its not about how much you earn, its about your health and the health of others around you. Its about where the state places the people in terms of its priorities. If someone in Cuba has free health care, free education, a job, a home, food and secure in the thought that they will live and be cared for until 78.8 years (approx ;D) but earns $10 per day. Does that person have more or less than an old person here on the dole who has to choose to be warm or to eat and if they want looked after must be lucky to have a caring family or money to go to a care home but who might have an income of $30 per day? Who is more free and liberated? Does the income matter? Or is wealth based on material things like cars and clothes and Gucci handbags to you? Only stupid people think that.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Any non-Communist opinion is irrelevant
Resistance is futile.............
You are stupid.
Have a look at this: http://www.indexmundi.com/cuba/demographics_profile.html Not bad for a third world country with nothing. And then have a look at its close neighbour in Haiti: http://www.indexmundi.com/haiti/demographics_profile.html
Of particular note are the life expectancy rates and literacy rates. The difference is down to the political systems in place and the exploitation by companies. Remember, Cuba kicked out the United Fruit Company of the USA as well as the other oil and gas companies as did Venezuela and Bolivia. They use their resources for their people. Ireland gave ours away to Shell but you like that type of system don't you?
Cuba sounds like quite the spot. How many poor people in Florida are building rafts to float over to Cuba?
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 05:00:51 PM
Ah but you see, in terms of Shell, that is the capitalist system at work. That's how it works. Private companies exploit other Nations' resources for gain. You can't argue against it and then argue for it at the same time. That's just, well... STUPID.
The proclamation was the basis that inspired the Democratic programme. The democratic programme was used as the manifesto for Sinn Féin who landslided to victory in the 1918 election.
And just on your last point and I can't believe I'm having to repeat this same question again. Can you please explain a case for capitalism?
I have not made a case for Capitalism. I am not arguing for Shell in any way. In fact there really isn't any need for me in the debate at all. You are arguing with yourself and it is very entertaining. But of course with Communism there is no opposition tolerated.
However you have done a service here as there may be some naive 26 counties people who are not aware of Sinn Féin's Communist plans for us.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 29, 2011, 05:36:04 PM
Cuba sounds like quite the spot. How many poor people in Florida are building rafts to float over to Cuba?
:D :D :D
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 29, 2011, 05:36:04 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 04:20:31 PM
Once again, your failure to read is remarkable for someone who writes so much tripe. This is the point where I say, why did I bother?
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Anyone who isn't a Communist is a rabid Capitalist.
Not true. Most people are apathetic and aren't 'anything' and therefore unfortunately ignorant to what could be for the masses. Those who exploit through landlordism and cheap labour etc. are bad, greedy, immoral and probably rabid.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Any bad regime which isn't Communist proves Communism is right
Any bad regime which is Communist wasn't doing it right and must be omitted from any debate
First point, it doesn't prove that communism is 'right'. But why wouldn't you want to fix bad regimes with a much better and fairer one? Tumble weeds flew past when I read that one.
Second point. Some states tried to do it and done it badly. Some were met with so much resistance that they collapsed. Some were only communist states in name only. But tell me one place where Capitalism works. (You have failed to answer that question in ANY of your replies to me).
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Our history is irrelevant but Bolivia's history is crucial
The fact that people on the dole here make more money than the average Bolivian worker is irrelevant
Our history is totally relevant as is Bolivia's but they cannot be compared. I have answered this a few times but you are too lazy or too stupid to read or understand it. Poverty is relative. Its not about how much you earn, its about your health and the health of others around you. Its about where the state places the people in terms of its priorities. If someone in Cuba has free health care, free education, a job, a home, food and secure in the thought that they will live and be cared for until 78.8 years (approx ;D) but earns $10 per day. Does that person have more or less than an old person here on the dole who has to choose to be warm or to eat and if they want looked after must be lucky to have a caring family or money to go to a care home but who might have an income of $30 per day? Who is more free and liberated? Does the income matter? Or is wealth based on material things like cars and clothes and Gucci handbags to you? Only stupid people think that.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 03:44:02 PM
Any non-Communist opinion is irrelevant
Resistance is futile.............
You are stupid.
Have a look at this: http://www.indexmundi.com/cuba/demographics_profile.html Not bad for a third world country with nothing. And then have a look at its close neighbour in Haiti: http://www.indexmundi.com/haiti/demographics_profile.html
Of particular note are the life expectancy rates and literacy rates. The difference is down to the political systems in place and the exploitation by companies. Remember, Cuba kicked out the United Fruit Company of the USA as well as the other oil and gas companies as did Venezuela and Bolivia. They use their resources for their people. Ireland gave ours away to Shell but you like that type of system don't you?
Cuba sounds like quite the spot. How many poor people in Florida are building rafts to float over to Cuba?
I'm sure the United States embargo of Cuba since 1960 hasn't had any effect on the living standards of Cubans at all.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:33:37 PM
I'm sure the United States embargo of Cuba since 1960 hasn't had any effect on the living standards of Cubans at all.
Yea, if Cuba was left alone they could be a Bolivia.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:33:37 PM
I'm sure the United States embargo of Cuba since 1960 hasn't had any effect on the living standards of Cubans at all.
Yea, if Cuba was left alone they could be a Bolivia.
We'll never know what it could have been, that's my point. Plus the US has been up to a whole lot more than just an economic embargo.
I'm not sure what your glib comparison with Bolivia was attempting to illustrate since the two countries have completely different histories, perhaps you could expand?
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:56:54 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:33:37 PM
I'm sure the United States embargo of Cuba since 1960 hasn't had any effect on the living standards of Cubans at all.
Yea, if Cuba was left alone they could be a Bolivia.
We'll never know what it could have been, that's my point. Plus the US has been up to a whole lot more than just an economic embargo.
I'm not sure what your glib comparison with Bolivia was attempting to illustrate since the two countries have completely different histories, perhaps you could expand?
Read the thread.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:33:37 PM
I'm sure the United States embargo of Cuba since 1960 hasn't had any effect on the living standards of Cubans at all.
Yea, if Cuba was left alone they could be a Bolivia.
Imagine what they could do though. They offer free education to international students too to become doctors, nurses and dentists etc.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 05:37:37 PM
I have not made a case for Capitalism. I am not arguing for Shell in any way. In fact there really isn't any need for me in the debate at all. You are arguing with yourself and it is very entertaining. But of course with Communism there is no opposition tolerated.
However you have done a service here as there may be some naive 26 counties people who are not aware of Sinn Féin's Communist plans for us.
What happens when you assume?
I'm not a Shinner.
You aren't offering anything to the debate anyway. Lazy comment after lazy uneducated comment is all that is coming from you.
Quote from: dec on December 29, 2011, 05:31:56 PM
When there are high rates of immigrants into a country then the government is probably doing something right.
Generally free market/capitalist countries have people trying to get in.
When people are trying to get into a country, governments are probably doing something right?????? How many people are leaving Cuba? Do you know or are you just another assumer? Would you say America is a good example of a 'government that is probably doing something right'? Because people have been going to America for centuries now. A place where 95% of the wealth is owned by 5% of the people. A place where if you don't have the finances to pay for surgery and operations, you die early. A place where homelessness and poverty is rife. Doesn't sound like a good place to live to me. Might be if you have a couple of quid.
Free market countries have people trying to get in because the exact system that they use is raping the shit out of the countries from where they come from. World starvation and poverty is capitalisms fault. People are heading to 'free market countries' from nations around the world that have been savaged by the free marketers in an attempt to survive because of the state of their own countries.
Its ok for you to say that your Free market country is doing ok and has worked for you. What about the countries that have nothing any longer because of economic colonialism and imperialism that feeds the 'free markets'?
I ask any opponent of Socialism or indeed Communism to tell me a fairer system.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:00:47 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:56:54 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:33:37 PM
I'm sure the United States embargo of Cuba since 1960 hasn't had any effect on the living standards of Cubans at all.
Yea, if Cuba was left alone they could be a Bolivia.
We'll never know what it could have been, that's my point. Plus the US has been up to a whole lot more than just an economic embargo.
I'm not sure what your glib comparison with Bolivia was attempting to illustrate since the two countries have completely different histories, perhaps you could expand?
Read the thread.
I'll translate what he means by that Arthur: "I don't know".
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 07:04:03 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:00:47 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:56:54 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 06:40:26 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 06:33:37 PM
I'm sure the United States embargo of Cuba since 1960 hasn't had any effect on the living standards of Cubans at all.
Yea, if Cuba was left alone they could be a Bolivia.
We'll never know what it could have been, that's my point. Plus the US has been up to a whole lot more than just an economic embargo.
I'm not sure what your glib comparison with Bolivia was attempting to illustrate since the two countries have completely different histories, perhaps you could expand?
Read the thread.
I don't know
Your tactics are really original. Imagine arguing on the internet and calling anyone who disagrees with you 'stupid'. Then you answer for them as well. Seriously, I've looked at the internet quite a bit and no one ever ever tried that.
Arthur, both Bolivia and Cuba were held up by our resident Commies as the utopias that Ireland could be, if only we embraced true Communism. This ludicrous comparison was made despite the fact that people earn more on the dole in Ireland than they do on an average wage in either country. When Bolivia and Cuba Communist successes were analyzed we were then told that you can't compare Bolivia/Cuba with Ireland. ::)
The only reason Sinn Féin lean to the left is because they perceive Britain as leaning to the right. If the Brits were Communist Sinn Féin would would be extreme right-wing.
As an aside, this has been one of the funniest threads ever on the board. Please continue entering us......
Serious question, why has the us an embargo on Cuba while it doesn't on other "communist" countries such as China. Surely Cuba is no threat to the us anymore.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 29, 2011, 07:43:26 PM
Serious question, why has the us an embargo on Cuba while it doesn't on other "communist" countries such as China. Surely Cuba is no threat to the us anymore.
The Russians plans to put nuclear weapons there and point them at the USA in the early 1960s probably had something to do with it.
It is illogical now though, but logic does't always defeat dogma.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:49:01 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 29, 2011, 07:43:26 PM
Serious question, why has the us an embargo on Cuba while it doesn't on other "communist" countries such as China. Surely Cuba is no threat to the us anymore.
The Russians plans to put nuclear weapons there and point them at the USA in the early 1960s probably had something to do with it.
It is illogical now though, but logic does't always defeat dogma.
Check your chronology there Muppet.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 29, 2011, 07:43:26 PM
Serious question, why has the us an embargo on Cuba while it doesn't on other "communist" countries such as China. Surely Cuba is no threat to the us anymore.
I'm open to correction on this but I think it's because of the Cuban-American lobby, most of which is based in the electorally important state of Florida.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 07:56:22 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:49:01 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 29, 2011, 07:43:26 PM
Serious question, why has the us an embargo on Cuba while it doesn't on other "communist" countries such as China. Surely Cuba is no threat to the us anymore.
The Russians plans to put nuclear weapons there and point them at the USA in the early 1960s probably had something to do with it.
It is illogical now though, but logic does't always defeat dogma.
Check your chronology there Muppet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis (http://[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis)[/url]
October 1962.
Checked. ;D
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 08:07:11 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 07:56:22 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:49:01 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 29, 2011, 07:43:26 PM
Serious question, why has the us an embargo on Cuba while it doesn't on other "communist" countries such as China. Surely Cuba is no threat to the us anymore.
The Russians plans to put nuclear weapons there and point them at the USA in the early 1960s probably had something to do with it.
It is illogical now though, but logic does't always defeat dogma.
Check your chronology there Muppet.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis (http://[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis)[/url]
October 1962.
Checked. ;D
But the embargo was in place before the Cuban Missile crisis.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 08:07:11 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 07:56:22 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:49:01 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 29, 2011, 07:43:26 PM
Serious question, why has the us an embargo on Cuba while it doesn't on other "communist" countries such as China. Surely Cuba is no threat to the us anymore.
The Russians plans to put nuclear weapons there and point them at the USA in the early 1960s probably had something to do with it.
It is illogical now though, but logic does't always defeat dogma.
Check your chronology there Muppet.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis (http://[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis)[/url]
October 1962.
Checked. ;D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba
U.S. arms embargo had been in force since
March 1958In
July 1960, in response to Cuba's new revolutionary government's seizure of US properties, the United States reduced the Cuban import quota of brown sugar to 700,000 tons
President John F. Kennedy extended measures by Executive Order, first widening the scope of the trade restrictions on February 7 (announced on February 3 and again on
March 23, 1962).
Though the majority of the embargo rules do date from after 1962.
The embargo only became law in 1992.
Either way it was a reaction to Cuba's closer dealings with the Russians along with the seizing of assets of US citizens by Cuba.
"The embargo only became law in 1992"
You're clutching at straws now :)
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on December 29, 2011, 08:16:26 PM
Quote from: Denn Forever on December 29, 2011, 02:20:55 PM
What is the difference between Socialism and Communism?
This an honest question. Is communism the bastardisation of Socialism to gain and hold on to power? This is what happened in Cuba and fortunately does not seem to have happened in Bolivia. Can't say Venezuela as Chavez was trying to make himself president for life.
The waters often get muddled between the two, but essentially Socialism, like Capitalism, is an economic management theory which has little to say about what should happen beyond this other than to say that the producers of economic wealth and material goods should be the ones that manage it under collective control, unlike Capitalism where it puts emphasis on private ownership. Communism however takes this much further into being not only an economic theory but also a political and social theory. Fascism, Libertarianism (both right and left variants), Anarchism and plenty of other minor theories work along similar lines though ideologues can be vastly different. Communism seeks to collectivise all property and to eliminate capitalist theory whereas Socialism allows for at least some element of private ownership alongside collective or public ownership. Both Socialism and Capitalism can exist in either a democracy, a totalitarian dictatorship or somewhere in between whereas Communism's main goal is the eventual disappearance of class and the state. Also where Communism seeks to distribute goods and services according to people's needs ("From each according to his ability, for each according to his needs"), Socialism does allow for economic wealth redistribution while still asserting that those that produce more should receive more.
Effectively, Communism is a "fork" of original 19th century Socialist ideas, and many forks still branch out from it, ranging from Social Democracy to Anarcho-Communism to Libertarian Socialism. Think of the original Sinn Fein party under Arthur Griffin and the way over time various 'splits' broke away from it for differing reasons and that should give you a rough idea.
Great post.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
"The embargo only became law in 1992"
You're clutching at straws now :)
That straw is a fact.
Are you arguing that Cuba's relationship with Russia had nothing to do with the US embargo?
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 08:25:39 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
"The embargo only became law in 1992"
You're clutching at straws now :)
That straw is a fact.
Are you arguing that Cuba's relationship with Russia had nothing to do with the US embargo?
The embargo pushed the Cubans into the arms of the Soviets as they needed an ally due to the hostility of the US to the Cuban Revolution.
Of course you seem to think the embargo came into place in 1992 as a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Nice logic.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:42:39 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 08:25:39 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
"The embargo only became law in 1992"
You're clutching at straws now :)
That straw is a fact.
Are you arguing that Cuba's relationship with Russia had nothing to do with the US embargo?
The embargo pushed the Cubans into the arms of the Soviets as they needed an ally due to the hostility of the US to the Cuban Revolution.
Of course you seem to think the embargo came into place in 1992 as a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Nice logic.
;D
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:26:18 PM
When Bolivia and Cuba Communist successes were analyzed we were then told that you can't compare Bolivia/Cuba with Ireland. ::)
The only reason Sinn Féin lean to the left is because they perceive Britain as leaning to the right. If the Brits were Communist Sinn Féin would would be extreme right-wing.
As an aside, this has been one of the funniest threads ever on the board. Please continue entering us......
Are you actually for real? You can't compare like for like for a million reasons. The reason they were used as examples is because they are the best examples in the world at present where political reforms are making a difference to the lives of its citizens. The opposite is happening here. Do you understand this point?
Your point about SF being left because Britain is on the right must be a wind-up. Please tell me your 10 year old son came on the internet and wrote that while you were going to the toilet or something.
And no, I wouldn't 'enter' you for all the money in the royal mint.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:42:39 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 08:25:39 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
"The embargo only became law in 1992"
You're clutching at straws now :)
That straw is a fact.
Are you arguing that Cuba's relationship with Russia had nothing to do with the US embargo?
The embargo pushed the Cubans into the arms of the Soviets as they needed an ally due to the hostility of the US to the Cuban Revolution.
Of course you seem to think the embargo came into place in 1992 as a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Nice logic.
The Cuban revolution nationalised assets, including those of US citizens. The US started imposing sanctions and had a couple of failed intervention attempts. The by now Communist Cubans turned to the USSR for vital trade markets. The US increased the range of sanctions. Then we had the Cuban missile crisis. The USA agreed not to invade Cuba as part of the settlement. But again the US increased the sanctions. Those sanctions were formalized into a law introduced in 1992.
Those sanctions are still in place even though most people would see them as outdated and idiotic. See this story about a grandmother being fined for visiting Cuba: http://havanajournal.com/travel/entry/us_fines_veteran_cyclist_5000_for_taking_holiday_in_cuba/ (http://havanajournal.com/travel/entry/us_fines_veteran_cyclist_5000_for_taking_holiday_in_cuba/)
Where is your problem with any of this?
The law was introduced in 1992. That is a fact. Why do you have such difficulty with that?
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:42:39 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 08:25:39 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
"The embargo only became law in 1992"
You're clutching at straws now :)
That straw is a fact.
Are you arguing that Cuba's relationship with Russia had nothing to do with the US embargo?
The embargo pushed the Cubans into the arms of the Soviets as they needed an ally due to the hostility of the US to the Cuban Revolution.
Of course you seem to think the embargo came into place in 1992 as a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Nice logic.
The Cubans relied on China and Russia for economic support and resources as well as an outlet for its sugar. The reason for the upkeep of the embargo currently is to try to destroy Cuba. This as well as other propaganda campaigns are ongoing attempts by the right and the US based Batista Cubans who felt hard done by because Castro and Che Guevara made hospitals out of their mansions, to deny this small island of any opportunity for extra finances. (http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-Cuba-claims-US-legislator-trying-to-sabotage-access-to-oil-reserves-6674.html)
How dare a small third world country, formerly a play park for the rich and famous yanks, that sits around 90 miles from American soil show the rest of the world how to look after its people with socialist love?
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 08:49:36 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 07:26:18 PM
When Bolivia and Cuba Communist successes were analyzed we were then told that you can't compare Bolivia/Cuba with Ireland. ::)
The only reason Sinn Féin lean to the left is because they perceive Britain as leaning to the right. If the Brits were Communist Sinn Féin would would be extreme right-wing.
As an aside, this has been one of the funniest threads ever on the board. Please continue entering us......
Are you actually for real? You can't compare like for like for a million reasons. The reason they were used as examples is because they are the best examples in the world at present where political reforms are making a difference to the lives of its citizens. The opposite is happening here. Do you understand this point?
Your point about SF being left because Britain is on the right must be a wind-up. Please tell me your 10 year old son came on the internet and wrote that while you were going to the toilet or something.
The dole here is worth more than the average job there. Do you understand that?
Sinn Féin seems to exist merely to oppose Britain. Look at the 'West Brit' insult used by McGuinness. 'West French' or 'West German' wouldn't quite mean the same thing when uttered by a Republican would it?
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 08:59:51 PM
How dare a small third world country, formerly a play park for the rich and famous yanks, that sits around 90 miles from American soil show the rest of the world how to look after its people with socialist love?
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D
A model nation for human rights.
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:05:00 PM
The dole here is worth more than the average job there. Do you understand that?
Do you understand the word 'relative'? It's not your uncle or cousin. :D
But the person who gets their dole doesn't get it in Peso's and can't collect and spend it in Havana on a weekly basis. Do you understand that? Do you understand the value of currency changes from country to country? Do you understand that in Cuba there is nobody going hungry or having to decide to eat or heat unlike here with the dole? Do you understand that there is no such thing as a University fee or loan in Cuba because education is free? Do you understand that there is no need to private health care because Cuba has one of the best health systems in the world and FREE for its people.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:18:45 PM
Do you understand that in Cuba there is nobody going hungry or having to decide to eat or heat unlike here with the dole?
If I was in the Caribbean I wouldn't be worrying too much about the heating bill either.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:18:45 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:05:00 PM
The dole here is worth more than the average job there. Do you understand that?
Do you understand the word 'relative'? It's not your uncle or cousin. :D
But the person who gets their dole doesn't get it in Peso's and can't collect and spend it in Havana on a weekly basis. Do you understand that? Do you understand the value of currency changes from country to country? Do you understand that in Cuba there is nobody going hungry or having to decide to eat or heat?
How would you know? It is a crime there to even suggest it: http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747 (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747)
The Criminal Code mandates a three-month to one-year sentence for anyone who "publicly defames, denigrates, or scorns the Republic's institutions, the political, mass, or social organizations of the country, or the heroes or martyrs of the nation." This sweeping provision potentially outlaws mere expressions of dissatisfaction or disagreement with government policies or practices, clearly violating free expression. The protection from insult of lifeless entities, and state-controlled institutions and organizations in particular, appears designed solely to preserve the current government's powerThank your lucky stars you are in Ireland where you allowed to speak up.
Ah the sovereign state of Ireland that belongs to the world bank.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:29:20 PM
Ah the sovereign state of Ireland that belongs to the world bank.
Do you mean the IMF?
They are not the same thing: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/exrp/differ/differ.htm (http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/exrp/differ/differ.htm)
Ireland debt to the IMF is relatively small in terms of its overall debt.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:29:20 PM
Ah the sovereign state of Ireland that belongs to the world bank.
Is economic sovereignty more important than human rights?
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:35:48 PMIreland debt to the IMF is relatively small in terms of its overall debt.
Tell that to the single parent whose state support is being slashed or the unemployed or the to the people who were missing a person at the Christmas table this year because of emigration. I'm sure you have filled their hearts with solace. Anyway, i've wasted an awful lot of time and wisdom on a Fine Gael fuckwit. (I'm assuming again but I bet ya I'm right).
Quote from: Rossfan on December 28, 2011, 07:55:42 PM
Quote from: ardal on December 28, 2011, 07:54:26 PM
"Are there jobs in Ireland today? Yep, but they may be in hot food bars or as shop assistants, but they are still jobs
Will you take up one of those jobs ? ::)
A better question wold have been, "have I...".
Moy park
Trueform
Crazy Prices
Stewarts
Group 4
BT cellnet
Call centre (cablelink)
call centre (SPA)
I'd take any job rather than sit on the dole; sorry but that's my attitude
Does it have to be either or in this debate?
Communism of choice (not the dictatorships often quoted) has some valid safeguards in it which rampant capitalism could do with in the same manner that those who bother to make the most effort should be rewarded more than those who are treading water. I'm sure there's a lot of people we all could name have lived on state benefits here and have no desire to work. IMO the welfare state is not for able bodied, but lazy good for nothings, its for people who not through the lack of effort have fallen on bad times and need a help to get back on the workforce. I agree with the concept of unions but how they often work in reality in the few instances I've seen them has turned me off them.
What has happened recently with the bailing out of the financial institutions, effectively nationalising them was a form of socialist policy Tony Benn would have been proud of, but he wouldn't have let them off scot free like they were with tax payers money to continue with the same unhindered, greed driven agenda's. If true capitism had been adhered to they should have been let go to the wall and the stronger ones would have survived. IMO I'd have let them go, but as the rules are written by the rich for the rich that was never going to happen. David Cameron was very quick to potentially screw the British Export market to protect the city of London which only provides 6% of the UK's GDP.
The lessons of Enron, Lehmanns etc hasn't been learned as it hasn't needed to be and we'll be bailing out more institutions in the not too distant future.
Comparing two cities in 'emerging economies' I've had reason to visit recently, Bangalore in India and Shangai in China, there's no comparison in how the poor in each are catered for. In Bangalore, right beside marble and smoked glass offices of some of the big Western multinationals are people living under taurpalines. In Shangai, if they've poverty of that level they're better at hiding it, but you do see huge housing developments in the way in from the airports. I suppose both have they 'class' systems, one inherited from the British Raj' and the other 'party members'. It just seemed from my experiences that the Chinese system seemed a bit fairer, but no doubt they're far from perfect and they're hardly glowing examples of communism.
That's just my take on it
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 08:59:51 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:42:39 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 08:25:39 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 29, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
"The embargo only became law in 1992"
You're clutching at straws now :)
That straw is a fact.
Are you arguing that Cuba's relationship with Russia had nothing to do with the US embargo?
The embargo pushed the Cubans into the arms of the Soviets as they needed an ally due to the hostility of the US to the Cuban Revolution.
Of course you seem to think the embargo came into place in 1992 as a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Nice logic.
The Cubans relied on China and Russia for economic support and resources as well as an outlet for its sugar. The reason for the upkeep of the embargo currently is to try to destroy Cuba. This as well as other propaganda campaigns are ongoing attempts by the right and the US based Batista Cubans who felt hard done by because Castro and Che Guevara made hospitals out of their mansions, to deny this small island of any opportunity for extra finances. (http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-Cuba-claims-US-legislator-trying-to-sabotage-access-to-oil-reserves-6674.html)
How dare a small third world country, formerly a play park for the rich and famous yanks, that sits around 90 miles from American soil show the rest of the world how to look after its people with socialist love?
http://www.therealcuba.com/page5.htm
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:24:16 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:18:45 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:05:00 PM
The dole here is worth more than the average job there. Do you understand that?
Do you understand the word 'relative'? It's not your uncle or cousin. :D
But the person who gets their dole doesn't get it in Peso's and can't collect and spend it in Havana on a weekly basis. Do you understand that? Do you understand the value of currency changes from country to country? Do you understand that in Cuba there is nobody going hungry or having to decide to eat or heat?
How would you know? It is a crime there to even suggest it: http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747 (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747)
The Criminal Code mandates a three-month to one-year sentence for anyone who "publicly defames, denigrates, or scorns the Republic's institutions, the political, mass, or social organizations of the country, or the heroes or martyrs of the nation." This sweeping provision potentially outlaws mere expressions of dissatisfaction or disagreement with government policies or practices, clearly violating free expression. The protection from insult of lifeless entities, and state-controlled institutions and organizations in particular, appears designed solely to preserve the current government's power
Thank your lucky stars you are in Ireland where you allowed to speak up.
Or at least they'll just keep asking the question until you give the right answer.
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on December 30, 2011, 01:25:08 AMhttp://www.therealcuba.com/page5.htm
What you show here is the killing of Cornelio Rojas who was the Chief of Police in Santa Clara. He tortured young people, terrorised those who supported the revolution and was an all round bad guy not to mention Batista's right hand man in Santa Clara. In 1959, the revolution was coming to an end after Che Guevara's monumental victory in Santa Clara. They were in a state of revolution (still are) and I have no problem with the execution of this sc**bag.
What Che Guevara learned, mostly in Guatemala was, that after any revolution was the most precarious time for it because that is when the former ruling classes begin to scheme with others (namely the CIA) to begin a counter revolution. In Guatemala, where the socialist President Arbenz was elected democratically by the people, he chose not to punish those who were previously responsible for death, torture and crimes against humanity. He learned the hard way because the CIA then came in an held a coup d'etat with these very people that Arbenz chose not to pursue. Che rightly didn't take the chance.
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:52:15 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:35:48 PMIreland debt to the IMF is relatively small in terms of its overall debt.
Tell that to the single parent whose state support is being slashed or the unemployed or the to the people who were missing a person at the Christmas table this year because of emigration. I'm sure you have filled their hearts with solace. Anyway, i've wasted an awful lot of time and wisdom on a Fine Gael fuckwit. (I'm assuming again but I bet ya I'm right).
Wrong again dopey. ::)
You said the World Bank owned Ireland. I pointed out that it was the IMF and the debt is relatively small thus they don't own us. You were wrong as usual. Then somehow I am supposed to tell this to single parent and all of this makes me Fine Gael and, even better, you think that is a valid point?
This is the problem with people like you. Anyone who has a different opinion to you must (in your mind) hold the opposite and most extreme views. This seems to be the only way you can cope with a differing viewpoint. You create an image of a Rangers loving, Union Jack flying, Anglo-Irish Bank Executive who supports Fine Gael, Margaret Thatcher and Newt Gingrich to justify yourself.
Anyone who thinks we should model ourselves on Cuba is either certifiable or their name is Castro. Communism is disastrous for all unfortunate enough to suffer under it.
Quote from: trueblue1234 on December 30, 2011, 08:48:02 AM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:24:16 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:18:45 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:05:00 PM
The dole here is worth more than the average job there. Do you understand that?
Do you understand the word 'relative'? It's not your uncle or cousin. :D
But the person who gets their dole doesn't get it in Peso's and can't collect and spend it in Havana on a weekly basis. Do you understand that? Do you understand the value of currency changes from country to country? Do you understand that in Cuba there is nobody going hungry or having to decide to eat or heat?
How would you know? It is a crime there to even suggest it: http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747 (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747)
The Criminal Code mandates a three-month to one-year sentence for anyone who "publicly defames, denigrates, or scorns the Republic's institutions, the political, mass, or social organizations of the country, or the heroes or martyrs of the nation." This sweeping provision potentially outlaws mere expressions of dissatisfaction or disagreement with government policies or practices, clearly violating free expression. The protection from insult of lifeless entities, and state-controlled institutions and organizations in particular, appears designed solely to preserve the current government's power
Thank your lucky stars you are in Ireland where you allowed to speak up.
Or at least they'll just keep asking the question until you give the right answer.
Indeed, right up there with the very worst in human rights abuses.
Not at all. But most definitely worth highlighting.
Quote from: trueblue1234 on December 30, 2011, 02:47:11 PM
Not at all. But most definitely worth highlighting.
In the context of the level of freedom Cubans have, it doesn't even register.
In your opinion.
Quote from: trueblue1234 on December 30, 2011, 03:05:52 PM
In your opinion.
Well obviously. I didn't present it as anyone else's.
Although i'd assume most people would find Cuba's limitations on freedom of expression, association, assembly, movement, and the press as a significantly bigger deal than being asked to vote on something twice.
Quote from: trueblue1234 on December 30, 2011, 08:48:02 AM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:24:16 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:18:45 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 29, 2011, 09:05:00 PM
The dole here is worth more than the average job there. Do you understand that?
Do you understand the word 'relative'? It's not your uncle or cousin. :D
But the person who gets their dole doesn't get it in Peso's and can't collect and spend it in Havana on a weekly basis. Do you understand that? Do you understand the value of currency changes from country to country? Do you understand that in Cuba there is nobody going hungry or having to decide to eat or heat?
How would you know? It is a crime there to even suggest it: http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747 (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htm#P642_91747)
The Criminal Code mandates a three-month to one-year sentence for anyone who "publicly defames, denigrates, or scorns the Republic's institutions, the political, mass, or social organizations of the country, or the heroes or martyrs of the nation." This sweeping provision potentially outlaws mere expressions of dissatisfaction or disagreement with government policies or practices, clearly violating free expression. The protection from insult of lifeless entities, and state-controlled institutions and organizations in particular, appears designed solely to preserve the current government's power
Thank your lucky stars you are in Ireland where you allowed to speak up.
Or at least they'll just keep asking the question until you give the right answer.
I said I was voting no and reasons why here. In Cuban that could land me in jail.
muppet and 4father this is a great and well developed thread full of relevant points on both sides but please keep it civil. ;)
i didnt hear many objections here in dear old ireland when the boys were divvying out the estates of english landlords in the 20s and mikey arent many of the most sucessful businesses in the 26 the result of co-ops actually kerry group were oringinally a co-op the sponsors of your beloved football team. capitalists detest co-ops indeed the yanks delighted in trashing co-operatives every time they invaded their south american neighbours. what does it matter to america what system of governance in in place in other countries that are not even bordering them? what difference does it make? and nobody start talking shite about human rights abuses in these countries because the yanks dont give a flying fuk about human rights.
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
sounds like he failed to motivate his class, without wanted to sound glib
Quote from: lawnseed on December 30, 2011, 05:58:08 PM
arent many of the most sucessful businesses in the 26 the result of co-ops actually kerry group were oringinally a co-op the sponsors of your beloved football team.
Are they? Name them.
And in the Kerry Group example, would you not agree that their success has been realised since embracing the capital markets?
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Thanks for your contribution. ;D
Quote from: Maguire01 on December 29, 2011, 09:39:59 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 29, 2011, 09:29:20 PM
Ah the sovereign state of Ireland that belongs to the world bank.
Is economic sovereignty more important than human rights?
4 father?
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That sums it up in nutshell.
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That sums it up in nutshell.
Weren't you the lad championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism a few posts back?
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:18:34 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That sums it up in nutshell.
Weren't you the lad championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism a few posts back?
Where did I champion Irish Socialism or indeed any Socialism?
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:20:08 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:18:34 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That sums it up in nutshell.
Weren't you the lad championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism a few posts back?
Where did I champion Irish Socialism or indeed any Socialism?
"Arthur, both Bolivia and Cuba were held up by our resident Commies as the utopias that Ireland could be, if only we embraced true Communism. This ludicrous comparison was made despite the fact that
people earn more on the dole in Ireland than they do on an average wage in either country"
Though I'd say 'given' would be a more accurate word than 'earn'.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:27:01 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:20:08 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:18:34 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That sums it up in nutshell.
Weren't you the lad championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism a few posts back?
Where did I champion Irish Socialism or indeed any Socialism?
"Arthur, both Bolivia and Cuba were held up by our resident Commies as the utopias that Ireland could be, if only we embraced true Communism. This ludicrous comparison was made despite the fact that people earn more on the dole in Ireland than they do on an average wage in either country"
Though I'd say 'given' would be a more accurate word than 'earn'.
And you took from that I was championing Irish Socialism? ::)
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:31:37 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:27:01 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:20:08 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:18:34 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That sums it up in nutshell.
Weren't you the lad championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism a few posts back?
Where did I champion Irish Socialism or indeed any Socialism?
"Arthur, both Bolivia and Cuba were held up by our resident Commies as the utopias that Ireland could be, if only we embraced true Communism. This ludicrous comparison was made despite the fact that people earn more on the dole in Ireland than they do on an average wage in either country"
Though I'd say 'given' would be a more accurate word than 'earn'.
And you took from that I was championing Irish Socialism? ::)
I said you were "championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism". The dole is a form of Socialism is it not?
Actually while we're on the subject of the dole, do you think that everybody on the dole in Ireland should have their payments stopped? We wouldn't want them to end up with bad grades like the kids in that socialist classroom.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:38:00 PM
I said you were "championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism". The dole is a form of Socialism is it not?
Actually while we're on the subject of the dole, do you think that everybody on the dole in Ireland should have their payments stopped? We wouldn't want them to end up with bad grades like the kids in that socialist classroom.
I pointed out a fact. If I said it rains here more than in Cuba would I be 'championing' Irish rain?
No one from any remotely successful career would ever want Communism so the only likely supporters in Ireland would be those who would put themselves in charge, some of the unemployed and maybe low earners. By pointing out that the unemployed here would be considered rich in Cuba I was suggesting that if they wanted Cuban Communism they would be turkeys voting for Christmas.
Now back to the dole. Why would I think that everyone on the dole should have their payments stopped? Where have I ever suggested that? Are you another one of these people who think that anyone who disagrees with your extreme views must also be an extremist but one from the polar opposite?
With so many newly unemployed it is vital that the State is able to make payments to them. Fit and able people who have never worked and just suck from the system for all of their lives I would have little sympathy for, but there are plenty who have contributed and will hopefully contribute again and deserve to be looked after. Despite that the dole here appears to be on the high side compared with 6 counties.
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:55:19 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:38:00 PM
I said you were "championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism". The dole is a form of Socialism is it not?
Actually while we're on the subject of the dole, do you think that everybody on the dole in Ireland should have their payments stopped? We wouldn't want them to end up with bad grades like the kids in that socialist classroom.
I pointed out a fact. If I said it rains here more than in Cuba would I be 'championing' Irish rain?
No one from any remotely successful career would ever want Communism so the only likely supporters in Ireland would be those who would put themselves in charge, some of the unemployed and maybe low earners. By pointing out that the unemployed here would be considered rich in Cuba I was suggesting that if they wanted Cuban Communism they would be turkeys voting for Christmas.
Now back to the dole. Why would I think that everyone on the dole should have their payments stopped? Where have I ever suggested that? Are you another one of these people who think that anyone who disagrees with your extreme views must also be an extremist but one from the polar opposite?
With so many newly unemployed it is vital that the State is able to make payments to them. Fit and able people who have never worked and just suck from the system for all of their lives I would have little sympathy for, but there are plenty who have contributed and will hopefully contribute again and deserve to be looked after. Despite that the dole here appears to be on the high side compared with 6 counties.
"deserve to be looked after" Good man :) Sounds a lot like Socialism to me. So some forms of Socialism are good then? e.g. the dole, the NHS etc...
But doesn't the classroom analogy above sum Socialism up for you in a nutshell? Which is it? You seem pretty confused to me.
By the way, I'm not an extremist.....can you point out the views that I have expressed here that you find to be extreme? Thanks.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:38:00 PM
Actually while we're on the subject of the dole, do you think that everybody on the dole in Ireland should have their payments stopped? We wouldn't want them to end up with bad grades like the kids in that socialist classroom.
The point is that people generally have the option of earning more than those on the dole, by working. There is an incentive to work. The 'classroom story' was about the consequence of having no incentive.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 08:09:18 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:55:19 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:38:00 PM
I said you were "championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism". The dole is a form of Socialism is it not?
Actually while we're on the subject of the dole, do you think that everybody on the dole in Ireland should have their payments stopped? We wouldn't want them to end up with bad grades like the kids in that socialist classroom.
I pointed out a fact. If I said it rains here more than in Cuba would I be 'championing' Irish rain?
No one from any remotely successful career would ever want Communism so the only likely supporters in Ireland would be those who would put themselves in charge, some of the unemployed and maybe low earners. By pointing out that the unemployed here would be considered rich in Cuba I was suggesting that if they wanted Cuban Communism they would be turkeys voting for Christmas.
Now back to the dole. Why would I think that everyone on the dole should have their payments stopped? Where have I ever suggested that? Are you another one of these people who think that anyone who disagrees with your extreme views must also be an extremist but one from the polar opposite?
With so many newly unemployed it is vital that the State is able to make payments to them. Fit and able people who have never worked and just suck from the system for all of their lives I would have little sympathy for, but there are plenty who have contributed and will hopefully contribute again and deserve to be looked after. Despite that the dole here appears to be on the high side compared with 6 counties.
"deserve to be looked after" Good man :) Sounds a lot like Socialism to me. So some forms of Socialism are good then? e.g. the dole, the NHS etc...
But doesn't the classroom analogy above sum Socialism up for you in a nutshell? Which is it? You seem pretty confused to me.
By the way, I'm not an extremist.....can you point out the views that I have expressed here that you find to be extreme? Thanks.
I am not the slightest bit confused but thank you for your concern.
You are arguing against anyone who opposes Communism. Communism is a very extreme form of Government.
Now back to the dole. George W. Bush's Government and Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House both signed off on social welfare bills. Using your logic that makes them Socialists.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 08:09:18 PM
"deserve to be looked after" Good man :) Sounds a lot like Socialism to me. So some forms of Socialism are good then? e.g. the dole, the NHS etc...
Sounds more like an element of social deomcracy to me. Something that can (and does) exist alongside a market economy. As muppet implied, it's not a case of just 'black' or 'white'.
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 08:21:14 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 08:09:18 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 30, 2011, 07:55:19 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on December 30, 2011, 07:38:00 PM
I said you were "championing Irish Socialism over Cuban Socialism". The dole is a form of Socialism is it not?
Actually while we're on the subject of the dole, do you think that everybody on the dole in Ireland should have their payments stopped? We wouldn't want them to end up with bad grades like the kids in that socialist classroom.
I pointed out a fact. If I said it rains here more than in Cuba would I be 'championing' Irish rain?
No one from any remotely successful career would ever want Communism so the only likely supporters in Ireland would be those who would put themselves in charge, some of the unemployed and maybe low earners. By pointing out that the unemployed here would be considered rich in Cuba I was suggesting that if they wanted Cuban Communism they would be turkeys voting for Christmas.
Now back to the dole. Why would I think that everyone on the dole should have their payments stopped? Where have I ever suggested that? Are you another one of these people who think that anyone who disagrees with your extreme views must also be an extremist but one from the polar opposite?
With so many newly unemployed it is vital that the State is able to make payments to them. Fit and able people who have never worked and just suck from the system for all of their lives I would have little sympathy for, but there are plenty who have contributed and will hopefully contribute again and deserve to be looked after. Despite that the dole here appears to be on the high side compared with 6 counties.
"deserve to be looked after" Good man :) Sounds a lot like Socialism to me. So some forms of Socialism are good then? e.g. the dole, the NHS etc...
But doesn't the classroom analogy above sum Socialism up for you in a nutshell? Which is it? You seem pretty confused to me.
By the way, I'm not an extremist.....can you point out the views that I have expressed here that you find to be extreme? Thanks.
I am not the slightest bit confused but thank you for your concern.
You are arguing against anyone who opposes Communism. Communism is a very extreme form of Government.
Now back to the dole. George W. Bush's Government and Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House both signed off on social welfare bills. Using your logic that makes them Socialists.
No, using my logic George W. Bush's Government and Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House signed off bills which implemented a form of Socialism. Do you think there is no Socialism in the US?
Listen, you seem to think anyone against Communism must be a rabid right-winger. That has been the gist of 4fathers argument as well.
Of course you need a public Health system and some level of free education. Social Welfare has to exist at some level and by mentioning it in the States I obviously know that there are some Socialist style programmes in place there. On the rest (I might revise this for the banks) I would lean more to the right and the free market. As Maguire said, any system that doesn't reward ability and effort proportionally will fail. Any reasonable Government will try to blend some of the best ideas out there rather than follow one single ideology absolutely. But the analogy given above shows perfectly why totally following Socialist ideals is foolish and doesn't work.
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on December 30, 2011, 08:36:30 PM
Quote from: Sideline Ball on December 30, 2011, 06:07:17 PM
Having read this thread with great interest, here's a little tale that should provoke debate:
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equaliser.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Marx's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little..
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That's a story that I've seen doing the rounds for some time now which has its origins in the USA (no surprise since over there in the media, socialist and communist are indistinguishable). The problem is that the premise, while trying to making a point that has an element of validity (that equality of outcomes more often that not doesn't produce the best outcomes), is being politically spun and has at least one obvious flaw.
As I mentioned earlier, socialism is primarily an economic theory, not a social theory that is being presented here. More importantly there is nothing in original socialist thought that calls for equality of outcome that is being presented here; some later theories of socialist thinking do advocate this, communism in particular, but most don't call or seek equality of outcome. Rather it is equality of opportunity that is sought. And the rational behind equality of opportunity is most certainly not restricted to socialist or leftist thinking, it has many rightist and liberal proponents as well. The idea is strongly linked to meritocracy, which itself holds no real political leaning.
So as far as the story above goes, it gets a Grade F from me.
If the word Communism was used instead of Socialism, as you say most American consider them the same thing, wouldn't that fix your flaw?
Didn't Marx describe Socialism as being the transition towards Communism?
Quote from: lawnseed on December 30, 2011, 05:58:08 PM
muppet and 4father this is a great and well developed thread full of relevant points on both sides but please keep it civil. ;)
i didnt hear many objections here in dear old ireland when the boys were divvying out the estates of english landlords in the 20s and mikey arent many of the most sucessful businesses in the 26 the result of co-ops actually kerry group were oringinally a co-op the sponsors of your beloved football team. capitalists detest co-ops indeed the yanks delighted in trashing co-operatives every time they invaded their south american neighbours. what does it matter to america what system of governance in in place in other countries that are not even bordering them? what difference does it make? and nobody start talking shite about human rights abuses in these countries because the yanks dont give a flying fuk about human rights.
Stop ducking my questions lawnseed.
How much land do you own ? How can you justify owning two cars ?
Unlike that provo, communist, gobshite 4father who is obviously just itching to knee-cap anyone that disagrees with his comic-book take on politics, you seem like a decent enough sort (albeit a bit mad) so I'm sure we can find some common ground if you would only answer my questions.
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 30, 2011, 10:36:09 PM
that provo, communist, gobshite 4father
Guilty on all 3 charges ;)
Oh.
Bonnie, meet Clyde.
Quote from: 4father on December 30, 2011, 11:45:35 PM
Oh.
Christ, you are very shy all of a sudden. You were very belligerent a while back ::)
Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Communism is the complete reverse.
A plague on all 'isms. A curse on all ideologies. What a batrayal of our struggle to the top of the evolutionary chain to abandon intelligence and reason for blind dogma and living by rote.
Quote from: Hardy on December 31, 2011, 01:14:47 PM
Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Communism is the complete reverse.
A plague on all 'isms. A curse on all ideologies. What a batrayal of our struggle to the top of the evolutionary chain to abandon intelligence and reason for blind dogma and living by rote.
If you look at a list of the world's famines in the last 150 years three main causes seem to emerge: Imperialism, Communism and War;
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 30, 2011, 10:36:09 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 30, 2011, 05:58:08 PM
muppet and 4father this is a great and well developed thread full of relevant points on both sides but please keep it civil. ;)
i didnt hear many objections here in dear old ireland when the boys were divvying out the estates of english landlords in the 20s and mikey arent many of the most sucessful businesses in the 26 the result of co-ops actually kerry group were oringinally a co-op the sponsors of your beloved football team. capitalists detest co-ops indeed the yanks delighted in trashing co-operatives every time they invaded their south american neighbours. what does it matter to america what system of governance in in place in other countries that are not even bordering them? what difference does it make? and nobody start talking shite about human rights abuses in these countries because the yanks dont give a flying fuk about human rights.
Stop ducking my questions lawnseed.
How much land do you own ? How can you justify owning two cars ?
Unlike that provo, communist, gobshite 4father who is obviously just itching to knee-cap anyone that disagrees with his comic-book take on politics, you seem like a decent enough sort (albeit a bit mad) so I'm sure we can find some common ground if you would only answer my questions.
land- a small holding of 23 acres nothing to crow about bought and not yet paid for.. maybe when i'm about 72
cars - 2 because myself and my wife work approx 40 miles apart. if either of us quit something has to give.
co-ops in the south, kerry group, golden vale, the sugar industry now defunked and a crime against the irish people, numerous marts, in essence the biggest part of the agri business in ireland has its roots in co-operatives.. the very industry the irish government are fronting as the key to economic recovery. nearer to home monaghan co-op and on and on.. all communism. south armagh farming enterprises- SAFE is/was a co-op. if you read through the thread you'll see that i'm not endorsing communism i want to know why the yanks hate it. in 1998 an american historian claimed that during the 'alamo' all american hero davy crocket tried to surrender :o guess what those who disagreed with him called him? A RAVING COMMUNIST! whats that got to do with davy fukn crocket?
Quote from: muppet on December 31, 2011, 01:36:41 PMIf you look at a list of the world's famines in the last 150 years three main causes seem to emerge: Imperialism.
Corrected that for you.
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on December 31, 2011, 03:40:23 AMChrist, you are very shy all of a sudden. You were very belligerent a while back ::)
Yea I shit myself when I saw you coming. I realised I spent nearly a full day on this yesterday. I'm not going back there. All the points have been made. You all won't change, neither will I. What's the point in continuing it?
Quote from: 4father on December 31, 2011, 02:54:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 31, 2011, 01:36:41 PMIf you look at a list of the world's famines in the last 150 years three main causes seem to emerge: Imperialism.
Corrected that for you.
Is that your best argument?
Quote from: lawnseed on December 31, 2011, 02:52:12 PM
the sugar industry now defunked and a crime against the irish people
Bring back the funk!
Quote from: muppet on December 31, 2011, 03:10:27 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 31, 2011, 02:54:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 31, 2011, 01:36:41 PMIf you look at a list of the world's famines in the last 150 years three main causes seem to emerge: Imperialism.
Corrected that for you.
Is that your best argument?
Yes Muppet, its the crux of it anyway. Adios mi amigo.
Is this thread supposed to be about America's foreign policy, in other words, giving itself the moral authority to interfere with South American countries and others than opted for socialism and communism and not those movements per se.
But I have no problem with dismissing communism, its obviously flawed. Socialism has brought some serious benefits to liberal capitalist democracies lets not forget that. That said I don't support Socialism in that I would like it in its totality running a country i live in.
Capitalism does work, and it can offer real benefit when it is tightly reigned and local scale economies are protected to survive.
The biggest problem capitalism has is growth, which may surprise you. it will find itself bumping its head against the amount of available resources if it grows at a massive rate.
Unfortunately we don't live on a planet that can support continuous growth, so if you can't keep growing then you either have to sacrifice growth or try and be more efficient with your resources and that usually means redundancy of people.
And this isn't really a capitalist problem its everyone's problem. We all (7bn) can't live in the suburbs with 2 cars and a big house. some will have to do the shitty jobs and some get to wipe their arse with €50 notes. And if 500 people get out of poverty in China then some 500 in the west or wherever needs to fall into it unless we can find a load of resources to support those extra people at the top table.
So no amount of "isms" is going to help us other than maybe giving up the notion of globalism and we accept a standard of living that's a bit closer to Amish than American Dream. Unless you are happy to sit on the beneficiary side imperialism, feudalism or fascism.
Well that's how I see our current predicament but I'm sure there are those who will disagree.
Quote from: thejuice on December 31, 2011, 06:00:55 PM
The biggest problem capitalism has is growth, which may surprise you. it will find itself bumping its head against the amount of available resources if it grows at a massive rate.
Unfortunately we don't live on a planet that can support continuous growth, so if you can't keep growing then you either have to sacrifice growth or try and be more efficient with your resources and that usually means redundancy of people.
And this isn't really a capitalist problem its everyone's problem.
Now we're getting somewhere. Worshipping at the altar of GDP and GNP growth does seem to be a problem. In time of war GDP goes up, in time of peace GDP goes down. When a natural disaster strikes GDP goes up as resources are marshaled to repair the damage.
There has to be better ways of measuring human progress.
Quote from: 4father on December 31, 2011, 05:45:45 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 31, 2011, 03:10:27 PM
Quote from: 4father on December 31, 2011, 02:54:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 31, 2011, 01:36:41 PMIf you look at a list of the world's famines in the last 150 years three main causes seem to emerge: Imperialism.
Corrected that for you.
Is that your best argument?
Yes Muppet, its the crux of it anyway. Adios mi amigo.
Britain is Imperialist thus you will sign up to the opposite, no matter what it is. Connolly, Griffith and Pearse never got to see Communism in action for long. They might have changed their attitude if they did.
Quote from: muppet on December 31, 2011, 01:36:41 PM
Quote from: Hardy on December 31, 2011, 01:14:47 PM
Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Communism is the complete reverse.
A plague on all 'isms. A curse on all ideologies. What a batrayal of our struggle to the top of the evolutionary chain to abandon intelligence and reason for blind dogma and living by rote.
If you look at a list of the world's famines in the last 150 years three main causes seem to emerge: Imperialism, Communism and War;
Religion should get an shout too. Assuming that Imperialism caters for Capitalism.
Jesus was surely a Socialist?
Quote from: Denn Forever on December 31, 2011, 07:54:10 PM
Jesus was surely a Socialist?
If he was a Communist he would have arrested himself and banned anyone from following him.
Quote from: thejuice on December 31, 2011, 06:00:55 PM
Is this thread supposed to be about America's foreign policy, in other words, giving itself the moral authority to interfere with South American countries and others than opted for socialism and communism and not those movements per se.
But I have no problem with dismissing communism, its obviously flawed. Socialism has brought some serious benefits to liberal capitalist democracies lets not forget that. That said I don't support Socialism in that I would like it in its totality running a country i live in.
Capitalism does work, and it can offer real benefit when it is tightly reigned and local scale economies are protected to survive.
The biggest problem capitalism has is growth, which may surprise you. it will find itself bumping its head against the amount of available resources if it grows at a massive rate.
Unfortunately we don't live on a planet that can support continuous growth, so if you can't keep growing then you either have to sacrifice growth or try and be more efficient with your resources and that usually means redundancy of people.
And this isn't really a capitalist problem its everyone's problem. We all (7bn) can't live in the suburbs with 2 cars and a big house. some will have to do the shitty jobs and some get to wipe their arse with €50 notes. And if 500 people get out of poverty in China then some 500 in the west or wherever needs to fall into it unless we can find a load of resources to support those extra people at the top table.
So no amount of "isms" is going to help us other than maybe giving up the notion of globalism and we accept a standard of living that's a bit closer to Amish than American Dream. Unless you are happy to sit on the beneficiary side imperialism, feudalism or fascism.
Well that's how I see our current predicament but I'm sure there are those who will disagree.
brilliant post 8) it mentions the question at least, but skips over the answer. also why would capitalist regimes seek to raise other countries from poverty since you infer that in doing so they are actually impoverishing people in their own country. recognising the fact that resources are finite. wouldnt it be more beneficial for the yanks to allow the rest of the world to be communist and they remain the only capitalist country, sure then they would truely rule the world seeing communism is such a basket case :P
So the man with 23 acres wants the world to go communist ;D
God love you, you are a lunatic !
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 12:48:55 AM
Quote from: hardstation on December 24, 2011, 12:23:07 AM
Lawnseed. The World. Communism. Lovely.
::)i am not promoting communism as a system of governance. ::) i am merely asking what is "Americas problem with communism?" in the handful of posts so far on this question no one has yet given a plausible reason for such venom against communism. the one thing that gets yanks going is the 'battle' against communism and yet Americans are perfectly happy to tr**p over injured and sick Americans on American streets who don't have medical insurance. the government of this great democracy are happy to intern US citizens never mind foreigners indefinitely. WE know how that went. if communism is such a failed system why are Americans so afraid of OTHER countries trying it out. the US meddled in the political affairs of south American countries that they saw developing Marxist type ideologies by actively promoting and aiding criminal gangs in those countries in efforts to destabilise them. they actually bombed south American government buildings killing all that were inside then introducing punitive sanctions announcing how they would bring that country 'back to the stoneage'. whats that about? why do they care?
well mikey all this time you were asking and waiting to tell me about my 23 acres.. and how i was a lunatic ::) i told you TWICE to read the thread.. you didnt bother.. :D
I went out with this girl over in America once.
She actually thought all countries in Europe (that she'd heard of) like France and Germany were Communist or ex-Communist. And this was why they weren't supporting the yanks in Eye-rack.
Suffice to say, we didn't go out on a second date.
Quote from: lawnseed on January 03, 2012, 10:29:09 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on December 24, 2011, 12:48:55 AM
Quote from: hardstation on December 24, 2011, 12:23:07 AM
Lawnseed. The World. Communism. Lovely.
::)i am not promoting communism as a system of governance. ::) i am merely asking what is "Americas problem with communism?" in the handful of posts so far on this question no one has yet given a plausible reason for such venom against communism. the one thing that gets yanks going is the 'battle' against communism and yet Americans are perfectly happy to tr**p over injured and sick Americans on American streets who don't have medical insurance. the government of this great democracy are happy to intern US citizens never mind foreigners indefinitely. WE know how that went. if communism is such a failed system why are Americans so afraid of OTHER countries trying it out. the US meddled in the political affairs of south American countries that they saw developing Marxist type ideologies by actively promoting and aiding criminal gangs in those countries in efforts to destabilise them. they actually bombed south American government buildings killing all that were inside then introducing punitive sanctions announcing how they would bring that country 'back to the stoneage'. whats that about? why do they care?
well mikey all this time you were asking and waiting to tell me about my 23 acres.. and how i was a lunatic ::) i told you TWICE to read the thread.. you didnt bother.. :D
whats your problem with Communism lawnseed..? why would you NOT promote it as a system of governance ?
Lawnseed ...this thread just never quite took off the way you expected did it ;D
(http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwcve6mva61qzrlhgo1_400.gif)
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on January 07, 2012, 04:07:45 AM
Lawnseed ...this thread just never quite took off the way you expected did it ;D
(http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwcve6mva61qzrlhgo1_400.gif)
i'm going to say it once more. WHAT IS AMERICAS PROBLEM WITH COMMUNISM? jeezas its what the whole thread is about! its not about me and my hobby farm or the tellys in my house or anything to do with me. i want to know why 'YOU' think the americans are happy to assassinate the democratically elected government of an impoverished south american country using american navy bombers just because it has marxist tendenancies. btw i'm irish and have no links to said government and own no land in any south american country. why do YOU think the americans did that mike? and why do you think they believe its ok or maybe you think its ok? this is not a trick question i'm merely soliciting your opinions/thoughts etc..
Going back to my earlier posts about growth and resources.
Perhaps a nationalised oil/gas resource is a threat to the consumerist way of life (freedom is a political by-word for consumerism in case you didn't know), the sprawling suburbia of big houses 2 cars and little in the way of public transport. I assume you are talking about Chile, with Allende and then Pinochet. I'm not sure how in that case my theory holds up, it is just a theory.
But there has been a belief in washington and in some parts of europe among leading politicians that world peace and stability is within our grasp by democratization and opening all nations up to the free market. That way nations will enter a state of co-dependence on others realising that any attack on the other harms the self.
I posted this in another thread and I think it sums it up pretty well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuAj2F54bdo
Also how are these guys doing, do they have a presidential candidate?
http://www.cpusa.org/
Quote from: lawnseed on January 07, 2012, 11:14:21 PM
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on January 07, 2012, 04:07:45 AM
Lawnseed ...this thread just never quite took off the way you expected did it ;D
i'm going to say it once more. WHAT IS AMERICAS PROBLEM WITH COMMUNISM? jeezas its what the whole thread is about! its not about me and my hobby farm or the tellys in my house or anything to do with me. i want to know why 'YOU' think the americans are happy to assassinate the democratically elected government of an impoverished south american country using american navy bombers just because it has marxist tendenancies. btw i'm irish and have no links to said government and own no land in any south american country. why do YOU think the americans did that mike? and why do you think they believe its ok or maybe you think its ok? this is not a trick question i'm merely soliciting your opinions/thoughts etc..
Oh its a "hobby" farm is it :D I must say it is wonderful to see a man such as yourself drag himself away from his hobbies to champion the interests of impoverished South Americans. You are not just a Champagne socialist..you are the Dom Perignon of Champagne socialists !
anyway, the gist of the thread is that you want other people to explain to you why some other people have a problem with an ideology that you yourself would not promote as a system of governance..do I have that right ?
God, you must be a pain in the arse to be around...you dont just want to pick fights with people you AGREE with, you want to pick fights with people who EXPLAIN the motives of those you agree with ;D
i'd like to think your deliberately dodging the question, but its obvious you dont understand it. so its better that i just leave you warming youself in a puddle of your own self congratulating delusional piddle.
Quote from: lawnseed on January 08, 2012, 11:03:26 PM
i'd like to think your deliberately dodging the question, but its obvious you dont understand it. so its better that i just leave you warming youself in a puddle of your own self congratulating delusional piddle.
Great post.
Quote from: lawnseed on January 02, 2012, 12:43:51 PM
recognising the fact that resources are finite. wouldnt it be more beneficial for the yanks to allow the rest of the world to be communist and they remain the only capitalist country, sure then they would truely rule the world seeing communism is such a basket case :P
Failed states, no matter where they are, are not in America's interest or the world's interest.
In any case communism leaves too many resources (the people in particular) untapped. I don't accept this idea that one part of the world has to get poorer for another to get rich. Living standards in the developing world have risen over the last few decades but this has not been accompanied by a corresponding widespread collapse in living standards in the west.
Quote from: lawnseed on January 08, 2012, 11:03:26 PM
i'd like to think your deliberately dodging the question, but its obvious you dont understand it. so its better that i just leave you warming youself in a puddle of your own self congratulating delusional piddle.
you haven't the balls to state your own position so why should anyone answer your question...? Since it was you the started the thread I think the bare minimum you should do is categorically state your own view on Communism before you attack anyone elses view on it.
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on January 09, 2012, 02:48:47 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on January 08, 2012, 11:03:26 PM
i'd like to think your deliberately dodging the question, but its obvious you dont understand it. so its better that i just leave you warming youself in a puddle of your own self congratulating delusional piddle.
you haven't the balls to state your own position so why should anyone answer your question...? Since it was you the started the thread I think the bare minimum you should do is categorically state your own view on Communism before you attack anyone elses view on it.
Thank you! His question was answered here, three pages into the thread, (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=20858.msg1059928#msg1059928) but he didn't seem terribly interested in discussing that post.
Quote from: trileacman on January 09, 2012, 12:00:03 AM
Quote from: lawnseed on January 08, 2012, 11:03:26 PM
i'd like to think your deliberately dodging the question, but its obvious you dont understand it. so its better that i just leave you warming youself in a puddle of your own self congratulating delusional piddle.
Great post.
Actually too good. Hmmm.