[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: The goal was to lend a hand to the cosmic purpose of ending capitalism on this particular planet. Maharishi, the Master of Masters in this Age, with His onepointed focus, simply did just that. The growth of the movement was an example of his taking advantage of our free market regulation balance. He was able to start up a business and then not pay taxes because of the designation educational. In my view we need to be able to tax religions and spiritual groups like everyone else. The movement's non profit educational organization status seems dubious to me but they pulled it off. But Maharishi for all his posturing was a big fan and beneficiary of capitalism. He was just not a fan of freedom for others. yeah, even David Lynch says now the TM movement has no morals. Did you see the memo sent around this last week with the DL interview from Iceland? He admits what has been pretty clear. noun 1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. In the post-MMY era, is the movement re-setting to become more socialistic? Look at the SBS Trust and Global Country now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Qu7a2lbkw or MUM as community. The old ownership form of the movement was to extract capital from the means of production and the community as a whole and transfer that to the East. The goal was to lend a hand to the cosmic purpose of ending capitalism on this particular planet. Maharishi, the Master of Masters in this Age, with His onepointed focus, simply did just that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
Okay and you would also want to police department to come if you had someone break into your house. And you would want the potholes in your streets and highways fixed to keep your car from being damaged. You probably like to walk in parks that are kept up. All these things are socialistic programs to maintain the commons. I am not so sure about that. Fire and police. parks and recreation, education, (and healthcare to an extent are services, fueled primarily by labor. They are not capital intensive -- a point I will return to. The above services can be private or public. We have a mix. While many are public there are vast numbers of private and public tennis and golf clubs,recreation area, private security forces, private schools. One for mis not intrinsically superior to the other in the quality of service provide or the efficiency with which it is delivered. Look at many public schools, low quality and high cost. But neither form, above is explicitly capitalistic or socialistic. Usually those terms refer to the ownership of capital. Technology is capital, Factories are capital. Chip fab plants are capital. people use capital to produce things, typically far more efficiently than by own labor exclusively. To be against capital is, well, insane, IMO. This cap / soc split is who owns the capital, and who makes the decision to invest in what type and how much new capital. And often this can lead to how to price the products and services that capital helps create. Fire dept and police, and many other public services, are labor intensive not capital intensive and tend to fall outside of traditional capitals and socialist models. in many cases, there is a if everyone doesn't get it, we are all screwed phenomenon. If I have fire dept service, and my neighbor doesn't his uncontrolled house fire might burn my house down. Ditto for police, public health, even the military etc. And education, if we have a bit part of society that is quite uninformed, has low critical thinking skills, has difficulties with abstract concepts, is a easy mark for logical fallacies, etc, then we are all screw2ed -- particularly in a democracy. So it makes sense to have universal service. These public services have little to do with capitalism or socialism. And some things, which everyone needs, and is much more costly if there are multiple producers -- like electric service -- could be, one would think at first glance, prime candidates for being socialized -- particularly given they are highly capita intensive. But the vast majority of electric service is provided by investor owned utilities. They are Highly regulated, but the capital belongs to private investors. And by having much capital available from private financial markets, investor owned utilities can pay for most things upfront and not charge customers upfront -- but rather over the life of the power plant etc. In contrast, municipal utilities -- aka socialized -- while often quite effective, have less access to capital markets and tend to have to charge customers much more upfront fees for capital expenditures. So, the public ownership of capital is not necessarily superior, in terms of quality of service, equity or or pricing models. Should all capital intensive industry be socialized? it would have some benefits, but also some downsides. Intel or Google as socialist enterprises? Not sure we would we much innovation. Or the emergence of new technologies if all capital intensive new technologies had to go through layers of bureaucratic controls. However, these firms are publicly owned -- that is any one can buy shares and in concept influence capital investment policy (far from ideal, and needing improvement, but governance of publicly traded companies is improving.) When I see calls for the end to capitalism, I tend to think they are referring to large companies that exist within, and take huge advantage of corrupt or feeble political systems -- such as we now have in the US, Europe and much of Asia. Calsl for a total end to captialism is not a particularly articulate, informed or well thought out view, IMO. You wouldn't want a privatized fire department who would let your house burn because you didn't pay them their yearly fee? Or a privatized police department to tell you to get lost because you didn't pay up as a burglar with a gun makes his way towards the room you're in. And Arizona already has a health care program. You probably avoid that so you can enjoy paying expensive premiums to a private insurer? Nobody is saying everything has to be socialized. It makes no sense for the family owned corner grocery or gas station to be socialized. The latter is the mistake some countries made in implementing socialism. That government is best which governs least
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: The goal was to lend a hand to the cosmic purpose of ending capitalism on this particular planet. Maharishi, the Master of Masters in this Age, with His onepointed focus, simply did just that. The growth of the movement was an example of his taking advantage of our free market regulation balance. He was able to start up a business and then not pay taxes because of the designation educational. In my view we need to be able to tax religions and spiritual groups like everyone else. The movement's non profit educational organization status seems dubious to me but they pulled it off. But Maharishi for all his posturing was a big fan and beneficiary of capitalism. He was just not a fan of freedom for others. yeah, even David Lynch says now the TM movement has no morals. Did you see the memo sent around this last week with the DL interview from Iceland? Classic drive by Doug. Seems constitutionally incapable of backing up any statement with real attribution. He admits what has been pretty clear. noun 1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. In the post-MMY era, is the movement re-setting to become more socialistic? Look at the SBS Trust and Global Country now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Qu7a2lbkw or MUM as community. The old ownership form of the movement was to extract capital from the means of production and the community as a whole and transfer that to the East. The goal was to lend a hand to the cosmic purpose of ending capitalism on this particular planet. Maharishi, the Master of Masters in this Age, with His onepointed focus, simply did just that.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
tartbrain wrote: Should all capital intensive industry be socialized? it would have some benefits, but also some downsides. Intel or Google as socialist enterprises? Not sure we would we much innovation. Or the emergence of new technologies if all capital intensive new technologies had to go through layers of bureaucratic controls. However, these firms are publicly owned -- that is any one can buy shares and in concept influence capital investment policy (far from ideal, and needing improvement, but governance of publicly traded companies is improving.) Intel was a business built on providing microchips back when there were many such businesses. They won out because IBM picked their processor. Same with Microsoft. Google is a different matter. Starting out analysts couldn't figure out how it was going to make any money but they've figured that out okay. And open source is a concept that scares the shit out of the establishment. They want to somehow make it illegal. But Scott McNealy of Sun during an interview a couple years back suggested that more than just software could be open source. Imagine if we had open source automobiles which folks interested in auto engineering could contribute innovative ideas for and firms could build without worrying about paying royalties for the designs. We would have much better and safer vehicles that way. Every time I boot up Windows and watch the rigmarole it goes through (too many ex-Boeing engineers at MS thinking in mainframe terms) to boot and how insecure it is. Why people continue to use it is beyond me but that is because the only commercial alternative is too expensive and the free ones still have a reputation of being too geeky even though they aren't (I'm using Thunderbird on Ubuntu to type this). The latter suffer from organizations reluctant to license codes to make it more competitive (probably more back alley deals from MS). The examples of the commons I brought up is what most liberal thinkers like to show as examples of how we have some socialism in our society and has been there from day one. In the small town where I grew up the owner of the local grocery had another store about 20 miles away. In that jurisdiction the fire department was privatized and he didn't want to pay the yearly fee. A fire in his store broke out and he had to watch it burn as the fire department came by to hose down nearby establishments who paid for the program. Privatization is a shitty idea of evil minded opportunists.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony...@... wrote: noun 1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. In the post-MMY era, is the movement re-setting to become more socialistic? Look at the SBS Trust and Global Country now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Qu7a2lbkw or MUM as community. The old ownership form of the movement was to extract capital from the means of production and the community as a whole and transfer that to the East. The goal was to lend a hand to the cosmic purpose of ending capitalism on this particular planet. Maharishi, the Master of Masters in this Age, with His onepointed focus, simply did just that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: The goal was to lend a hand to the cosmic purpose of ending capitalism on this particular planet. Maharishi, the Master of Masters in this Age, with His onepointed focus, simply did just that. The growth of the movement was an example of his taking advantage of our free market regulation balance. He was able to start up a business and then not pay taxes because of the designation educational. In my view we need to be able to tax religions and spiritual groups like everyone else. The movement's non profit educational organization status seems dubious to me but they pulled it off. But Maharishi for all his posturing was a big fan and beneficiary of capitalism. He was just not a fan of freedom for others. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: noun 1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. In the post-MMY era, is the movement re-setting to become more socialistic? Look at the SBS Trust and Global Country now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Qu7a2lbkw or MUM as community. The old ownership form of the movement was to extract capital from the means of production and the community as a whole and transfer that to the East. The goal was to lend a hand to the cosmic purpose of ending capitalism on this particular planet. Maharishi, the Master of Masters in this Age, with His onepointed focus, simply did just that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
Curtis: He was able to start up a business and then not pay taxes because of the designation educational... Apparently 'Maharishi Ayer-Veda' is a business that pays U.S. taxes. The school, MUM, being an education institution, does not pay taxes. In my view we need to be able to tax religions and spiritual groups like everyone else. So, you're in favor of changing the U.S. Constitution. How is that going to fly? The movement's non profit educational organization status seems dubious to me but they pulled it off. So, you're in favor of schools paying taxes. If so, then parents would have to pay tuition for their kids to go to public school? We already pay property taxes for education! But Maharishi for all his posturing was a big fan and beneficiary of capitalism. He was just not a fan of freedom for others. The Vedic religion, which the Maharishi espoused, was founded on 'capitalism' - private ownership of cattle. It may be that the Maharishi misunderstood his own tradition, but the Vedic-Aryans who entered India were egalitarian and republican in their social outlook. This was the age before the adoption of monarchy in India.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: You guys shouldn't have to worry about socialism. You won't have any money for them to run out of and will most likely be on the receiving end as the shit of the US economic collapse hits the fan. Got your check ready to pay off your share of the national debt? I didn't think so. How true ! :-) Mike Dixon wrote: the problem with Socialism is, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money. M. Thatcher From: BillyG wg...@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 3:09:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ . wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Socialism is great...when you're on the receiving end. It's nothing but pubescent idealism from those who think feeling is superior to thinking and have largely, their heads in the clouds. It's been tried and has failed over and over again!! Merit is the best motivator. I can understand my nephew being for socialism, he has nothing. but student loans! People over 30 ought to know better by now, from the lessons of History. Seems you confuse soscialism with communism. Communism is finished while soscial democracy is very much alive, thank you very much. And those contries are having the highests standards of living on this planet.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) I saw a show on TV that discussed some study concluding that Norwegians were the happiest people in the world. After Lichtenstein, they also have the highest standard of living in the world.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
On Mar 3, 2010, at 11:49 PM, ShempMcGurk wrote: However, the study alerts us to something that is much more important, and that is that the European welfare states are not making their citizens wealthier. Says who? This article does not quote one reputable source or statistic. And anyway, that isn't the function of good government--its function is to provide for all its citizens, so that people don't go homeless, hungry, and have good schools, roads, medical care, etc. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about this wonderful organization Shemp cites as his authority (note its place of origin--quelle surprise) The Ludwig von Mises Institute (LvMI), based in Auburn, Alabama... Its scholarship is inspired by the work of Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises. Hmmm...let's see now--an organization in the heart of the Deep South founded by a quasi-white supremacist born in the Victorian Age...that's Shemp's idea of scholarship. The Institute is generally critical of statism and democracy, with the latter being described in Institute publications as coercive[5], incompatible with wealth creation[6] replete with inner contradictions[7] and a system of legalized graft. Lovely. He then goes on to offer completely anecdotal evidence of how Germany's dental-care system is so much worse than in the US, based entirely on how an office looked. Strangely enough, he never provides any statistics on either the dental or medical system in the US that would bolster his argument. While East Berlin was likened to being the Paris of the then-communist world, it was more like a huge time warp in which one was placed back in 1948. The entire city was shabby, and what new construction there was had the appearance and attractiveness of a typical American public housing project. Apparently he's never been to Chicago, Detroit, Birmingham, etc. This genius is the best you can do, Shemp? Sad. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
Which makes us all slaves to debt, our own and the gubmint's. From: ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@netscape.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 9:52:30 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ ... wrote: the problem with Socialism is, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money.  M. Thatcher ...which is happening to us now! There's a reason our relatively young president has gained so much gray hair in only a year! He realizes that we are spending way, way more than we are taking in...and he knows the gravy train can't last forever... _ _ __ From: BillyG wg...@... To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 3:09:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.  --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ . wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Socialism is great...when you're on the receiving end. It's nothing but pubescent idealism from those who think feeling is superior to thinking and have largely, their heads in the clouds. It's been tried and has failed over and over again!! Merit is the best motivator. I can understand my nephew being for socialism, he has nothing. but student loans! People over 30 ought to know better by now, from the lessons of History.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ wrote: the problem with Socialism is, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money.  M. Thatcher ...which is happening to us now! There's a reason our relatively young president has gained so much gray hair in only a year! He realizes that we are spending way, way more than we are taking in...and he knows the gravy train can't last forever... It's not so much a gravy train as a soup line, actually, and it damn well better last until the economy recovers. In other words: He's not running up the deficit because he loves to spend. He's doing it to shore up the economy. When folks don't have any money to put into the economy, the government is the spender of last resort to keep it from collapsing completely. And don't forget how much of the deficit was inherited from Republican tax cuts for the wealthy, among other things.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On Mar 3, 2010, at 11:49 PM, ShempMcGurk wrote: However, the study alerts us to something that is much more important, and that is that the European welfare states are not making their citizens wealthier. Says who? This article does not quote one reputable source or statistic. And anyway, that isn't the function of good government--its function is to provide for all its citizens, so that people don't go homeless, hungry, and have good schools, roads, medical care, etc. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about this wonderful organization Shemp cites as his authority (note its place of origin--quelle surprise) The Ludwig von Mises Institute (LvMI), based in Auburn, Alabama... Its scholarship is inspired by the work of Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises. Hmmm...let's see now--an organization in the heart of the Deep South founded by a quasi-white supremacist Ludwig Von Mises escaped from the Nazis and fled to America because of his partly Jewish heritage. Far from being a quasi-white supremacist, Sal. born in the Victorian Age...that's Shemp's idea of scholarship. The Institute is generally critical of statism and democracy, with the latter being described in Institute publications as coercive[5], incompatible with wealth creation[6] replete with inner contradictions[7] and a system of legalized graft. Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. Lovely. He then goes on to offer completely anecdotal evidence of how Germany's dental-care system is so much worse than in the US, based entirely on how an office looked. Strangely enough, he never provides any statistics on either the dental or medical system in the US that would bolster his argument. While East Berlin was likened to being the Paris of the then-communist world, it was more like a huge time warp in which one was placed back in 1948. The entire city was shabby, and what new construction there was had the appearance and attractiveness of a typical American public housing project. Apparently he's never been to Chicago, Detroit, Birmingham, etc. This genius is the best you can do, Shemp? Sad. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
ShempMcGurk wrote: Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. Free markets are great for scam artists.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
ShempMcGurk wrote: BTW, you didn't answer this question the other day: would you let your house burn than have the local fire department put out the fire? ???Why would I do that? I pay my taxes and expect the services. But even if I didn't pay taxes I would still expect the fire company to come and put out the fire. Okay and you would also want to police department to come if you had someone break into your house. And you would want the potholes in your streets and highways fixed to keep your car from being damaged. You probably like to walk in parks that are kept up. All these things are socialistic programs to maintain the commons. You wouldn't want a privatized fire department who would let your house burn because you didn't pay them their yearly fee? Or a privatized police department to tell you to get lost because you didn't pay up as a burglar with a gun makes his way towards the room you're in. And Arizona already has a health care program. You probably avoid that so you can enjoy paying expensive premiums to a private insurer? Nobody is saying everything has to be socialized. It makes no sense for the family owned corner grocery or gas station to be socialized. The latter is the mistake some countries made in implementing socialism.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Mar 3, 2010, at 11:49 PM, ShempMcGurk wrote: However, the study alerts us to something that is much more important, and that is that the European welfare states are not making their citizens wealthier. Says who? This article does not quote one reputable source or statistic. And anyway, that isn't the function of good government--its function is to provide for all its citizens, so that people don't go homeless, hungry, and have good schools, roads, medical care, etc. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about this wonderful organization Shemp cites as his authority (note its place of origin--quelle surprise) The Ludwig von Mises Institute (LvMI), based in Auburn, Alabama...Its scholarship is inspired by the work of Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises. Hmmm...let's see now--an organization in the heart of the Deep South founded by a quasi-white supremacist Ludwig Von Mises escaped from the Nazis and fled to America because of his partly Jewish heritage. Far from being a quasi-white supremacist, Sal. No, no, Shemp. Don't you see, if his institute is located in Alabama and he was an Austrian, there's simply no question but that he was a quasi-white supremicist. All Austrians were Nazis, and all Alabamans are white supremicists. There's simply no other possible conclusion: he founded his institute in Alabama because its white supremacist views were so compatible with his racist Nazi ideology. Makes perfect sense; don't know why you'd even try to argue with it. faceplant
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: ShempMcGurk wrote: BTW, you didn't answer this question the other day: would you let your house burn than have the local fire department put out the fire? ???Why would I do that? I pay my taxes and expect the services. But even if I didn't pay taxes I would still expect the fire company to come and put out the fire. Okay and you would also want to police department to come if you had someone break into your house. And you would want the potholes in your streets and highways fixed to keep your car from being damaged. You probably like to walk in parks that are kept up. All these things are socialistic programs to maintain the commons. I disagree with your definition of the term socialistic. Here is what dictionary.com defines socialistic as: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialistic so·cial·is·tic#8194; #8194;/#716;so#650;#643;#601;#712;l#618;st#618;k/ Show Spelled[soh-shuh-lis-tik] Show IPA adjective 1.of or pertaining to socialists or socialism. 2.in accordance with socialism. 3.advocating or supporting socialism. ...and socialism in term is defined as: so·cial·ism#8194; #8194;/#712;so#650;#643;#601;#716;l#618;z#601;m/ Show Spelled[soh-shuh-liz-uhm] Show IPA noun 1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. 2.procedure or practice in accordance with this theory. 3.(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. So I think a better explanation of the paying for and maintaining of a police and fire department through taxes is just that: taxation for the general welfare. But it isn't socialism. You wouldn't want a privatized fire department who would let your house burn because you didn't pay them their yearly fee? Or a privatized police department to tell you to get lost because you didn't pay up as a burglar with a gun makes his way towards the room you're in. And Arizona already has a health care program. You probably avoid that so you can enjoy paying expensive premiums to a private insurer? Nobody is saying everything has to be socialized. It makes no sense for the family owned corner grocery or gas station to be socialized. The latter is the mistake some countries made in implementing socialism.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
ShempMcGurk wrote: So I think a better explanation of the paying for and maintaining of a police and fire department through taxes is just that: taxation for the general welfare. So then you aren't opposed to paying taxes for free health care? That promotes the general welfare. Do you participate in Arizona's health care program. If so then it would be hypocritical of you to criticize a similar program for the entire nation. And should we be paying taxes for the general welfare of non-citizens such as those in Afghanistan and Iraq? Last I looked those weren't US states though there are probably some US corporations that want them that way so they can get at the old. But it isn't socialism. But you and other wingnuts here keep calling government health care socialism as you do a number of other things. I think what you are actually against is communism not socialism.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. What this fellow felt is irrelevant. The social-democratic countries of northern-Europe of today has the highest standard of living on this planet. In addition; according to the UN, Norway is the best country to live followed by Denmark, of all countries on this planet ! And they are all socialist in your terminology shemp. Get used to it; they win, you loose. Maharishi told you this years ago but you refuse to listen even to Him: Now that communism is gone the next to go is capitalism - His Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi The silly capitalism is fast dying as we speak. In the long history of mankind it will command but a short sentence. In brackets.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
The Ludwig von Mises Institute (LvMI), based in Auburn, Alabama... Its scholarship is inspired by the work of Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises. Hmmm...let's see now--an organization in the heart of the Deep South founded by a quasi-white supremacist Ludwig Von Mises escaped from the Nazis and fled to America because of his partly Jewish heritage. Far from being a quasi-white supremacist, Sal. Being born nominally Jewish hardly innoculates one against white supremicism, Shemp. Far from it. born in the Victorian Age...that's Shemp's idea of scholarship. The Institute is generally critical of statism and democracy, with the latter being described in Institute publications as coercive[5], incompatible with wealth creation[6] replete with inner contradictions[7] and a system of legalized graft. Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, Right, which is why he made the above quote. and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. Which is why he burst out with Socialist! at that leftie Milton Vladimir Freidman during a meeting. Undoubtedly that was not an isolated circumstance, I would guess. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sallysunshine01 salsunsh...@... wrote: The Ludwig von Mises Institute (LvMI), based in Auburn, Alabama... Its scholarship is inspired by the work of Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises. Hmmm...let's see now--an organization in the heart of the Deep South founded by a quasi-white supremacist Ludwig Von Mises escaped from the Nazis and fled to America because of his partly Jewish heritage. Far from being a quasi-white supremacist, Sal. Being born nominally Jewish hardly innoculates one against white supremicism, Shemp. Far from it. born in the Victorian Age...that's Shemp's idea of scholarship. The Institute is generally critical of statism and democracy, with the latter being described in Institute publications as coercive[5], incompatible with wealth creation[6] replete with inner contradictions[7] and a system of legalized graft. Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, Right, which is why he made the above quote. Well, Sir Winston Churchill was a great advocate of democracy yet he is famous for saying: Democracy is the worst of all possible systems...except for every other one. Von Mises said the above in this same spirit. If you did a little research on the man, you'd see that he is, as I've already stated, a great advocate of democracy. As for your claim that he is a white supremacist or anything CLOSE to that, well, such a thing is diametrically opposed to everything he ever believed in. I have NO clue where he got that other than his institute is located in Alabama. Von Mises himself I believe lived his entire life in America in Chicago where he taught at the University of Chicago. But I could be wrong on that. and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. Which is why he burst out with Socialist! at that leftie Milton Vladimir Freidman during a meeting. Undoubtedly that was not an isolated circumstance, I would guess. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. What this fellow felt is irrelevant. The social-democratic countries of northern-Europe of today has the highest standard of living on this planet. In addition; according to the UN, Norway is the best country to live followed by Denmark, of all countries on this planet ! And they are all socialist in your terminology shemp. Get used to it; they win, you loose. Maharishi told you this years ago but you refuse to listen even to Him: Now that communism is gone the next to go is capitalism - His Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi The silly capitalism is fast dying as we speak. In the long history of mankind it will command but a short sentence. In brackets. According to the standards set up by the organisation doing the measuring, yes, the nordic countries came out #1. According to the article I reproduced here, they ain't doing so good. As for the success of their socialistic programs, they wouldn't have ANY success unless they had free market capitalism as their economic system. As for Maharishi's quote on capitalism, he knew as much about capitalism as he did about political parties. You remember the Natural Law Party, don't you, Nabby? How did THAT work out?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sallysunshine01 salsunshine@ wrote: snip The Institute is generally critical of statism and democracy, with the latter being described in Institute publications as coercive[5], incompatible with wealth creation[6] replete with inner contradictions[7] and a system of legalized graft. Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, Right, which is why he made the above quote. snip Von Mises said the above in this same spirit. Heads up, guys! No, he didn't. He didn't say the above in *any* spirit; that is not a quote from Mises. If you did a little research on the man, you'd see that he is, as I've already stated, a great advocate of democracy. That's correct, he was. The *Institute* isn't. As for your claim that he is a white supremacist or anything CLOSE to that, well, such a thing is diametrically opposed to everything he ever believed in. Again, the *Institute* has some questionable views in this area. I have NO clue where he got that other than his institute is located in Alabama. Von Mises himself I believe lived his entire life in America in Chicago where he taught at the University of Chicago. But I could be wrong on that. New York City, actually; he taught at NYU. He didn't found the Institute, his widow did after his death. Shemp, there are perfectly good articles on Mises and the Institute on Wikipedia. and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. Which is why he burst out with Socialist! at that leftie Milton Vladimir Freidman during a meeting. Undoubtedly that was not an isolated circumstance, I would guess. Good GRIEF. Talk about non sequiturs! This was at a meeting of a society founded by Friedman and Mises, along with Hayek, during a discussion in which some of the participants were justifying a progressive income tax. What kind of economic system does Stupid Sal think Mises advocated if she doesn't believe he was in favor of free-market democracy? And *none* of her attempted smears of Mises has anything to do with the validity of the article Shemp posted.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: ShempMcGurk wrote: BTW, you didn't answer this question the other day: would you let your house burn than have the local fire department put out the fire? ???Why would I do that? I pay my taxes and expect the services. But even if I didn't pay taxes I would still expect the fire company to come and put out the fire. Okay and you would also want to police department to come if you had someone break into your house. And you would want the potholes in your streets and highways fixed to keep your car from being damaged. You probably like to walk in parks that are kept up. All these things are socialistic programs to maintain the commons. You wouldn't want a privatized fire department who would let your house burn because you didn't pay them their yearly fee? Or a privatized police department to tell you to get lost because you didn't pay up as a burglar with a gun makes his way towards the room you're in. And Arizona already has a health care program. You probably avoid that so you can enjoy paying expensive premiums to a private insurer? Nobody is saying everything has to be socialized. It makes no sense for the family owned corner grocery or gas station to be socialized. The latter is the mistake some countries made in implementing socialism. That government is best which governs least
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG wg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: ShempMcGurk wrote: BTW, you didn't answer this question the other day: would you let your house burn than have the local fire department put out the fire? ???Why would I do that? I pay my taxes and expect the services. But even if I didn't pay taxes I would still expect the fire company to come and put out the fire. Okay and you would also want to police department to come if you had someone break into your house. And you would want the potholes in your streets and highways fixed to keep your car from being damaged. You probably like to walk in parks that are kept up. All these things are socialistic programs to maintain the commons. You wouldn't want a privatized fire department who would let your house burn because you didn't pay them their yearly fee? Or a privatized police department to tell you to get lost because you didn't pay up as a burglar with a gun makes his way towards the room you're in. And Arizona already has a health care program. You probably avoid that so you can enjoy paying expensive premiums to a private insurer? Nobody is saying everything has to be socialized. It makes no sense for the family owned corner grocery or gas station to be socialized. The latter is the mistake some countries made in implementing socialism. That government is best which governs least A stitch in time saves nine ...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... Von Mises was a great advocate of democracy, Sal, and felt that democracy along with a free market went hand in hand. What this fellow felt is irrelevant. The social-democratic countries of northern-Europe of today has the highest standard of living on this planet. In addition; according to the UN, Norway is the best country to live followed by Denmark, of all countries on this planet ! And they are all socialist in your terminology shemp. Get used to it; they win, you loose. Maharishi told you this years ago but you refuse to listen even to Him: Now that communism is gone the next to go is capitalism - His Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi The silly capitalism is fast dying as we speak. In the long history of mankind it will command but a short sentence. In brackets. What I suspect folks in the European countries are experiencing is a safety net where they don't have to worry about falling through the cracks like we do here. Capitalism as practiced in the US is sink or swim. And a lot of people are sinking. We have all kinds of irrational people much like the wingnuts on FFL who just are afraid of something like communism taking over. Of course a good safety net need not be communistic at all. There is this sort of bravado by wingnuts the winners in the swimfest when even themselves probably would sink quickly if they had to swim (and many day by day are). Our legislators are charged with maintaining life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and they are doing a piss poor job regardless of what side the aisle they are sitting on. It's more about their pursuit of happiness in corporate campaign contributions.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: ShempMcGurk wrote: So I think a better explanation of the paying for and maintaining of a police and fire department through taxes is just that: taxation for the general welfare. So then you aren't opposed to paying taxes for free health care? That promotes the general welfare. I am opposed to any kind of governmental intervention in health. Do you participate in Arizona's health care program. As I wrote here in the past, I used to participate in Arizona's universal health care program for the self-employed (everyone accepted, even with pre-existing conditions) but don't anymore. If so then it would be hypocritical of you to criticize a similar program for the entire nation. If I'm in prison I'll still eat at the prison cafeteria. And should we be paying taxes for the general welfare of non-citizens such as those in Afghanistan and Iraq? Let them eat hummus. Last I looked those weren't US states though there are probably some US corporations that want them that way so they can get at the old. But it isn't socialism. But you and other wingnuts here keep calling government health care socialism as you do a number of other things. I think what you are actually against is communism not socialism. No, I'm against both. But I will partake of any socialistic or otherwise government program if available to me. As for your insulting of my by calling me a wingnut, well, that makes you sound very un-Bhairitu like.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: ShempMcGurk wrote: So I think a better explanation of the paying for and maintaining of a police and fire department through taxes is just that: taxation for the general welfare. So then you aren't opposed to paying taxes for free health care? That promotes the general welfare. I am opposed to any kind of governmental intervention in health. That's because your from Canada and never experienced the thought that if something happened to you or your family you could go COMPLETELY bankrupt. It happened to some people I know - very wealthy people, who already had insurance. REMEMBER - the insurance companies can use their lawyers to come after you and take every non-essential dollar from you if you do not pay (if you are already poor, there's nothing to take, but they will charge you if you ever make money later.) REMEMBER: Even if it is to one of your family members that some long-term sickness happens, and you refuse to support them, the insurance companies can STILL come after YOUR money if the can show you are next of kin that has money. REMEMBER: Even if you do not want one of YOUR family members to pay for your health care, and you run out of money over time due to high costs and refusal by insurance company, then they can STILL go after one of your close family members and take THEIR money instead, and there is nothing you can do. But Shemp, you are obviously not married, or don't care about your wife's future if something goes wrong. You probably have no family in America, and therefore you have not thought it through at all. But one things for sure, when the sh!t hits the fan for you, you will be horrified by what happens to you. Your assessment of how things work in America is foolish, and just because you can always get free care in Canada whenever your want makes you COMPLETELY unable to think this topic through in any meanigful or useful way, and your opinion is entirely based on the fact you have no close family in America. OffWorld
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
ShempMcGurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: ShempMcGurk wrote: So I think a better explanation of the paying for and maintaining of a police and fire department through taxes is just that: taxation for the general welfare. So then you aren't opposed to paying taxes for free health care? That promotes the general welfare. I am opposed to any kind of governmental intervention in health. Do you participate in Arizona's health care program. As I wrote here in the past, I used to participate in Arizona's universal health care program for the self-employed (everyone accepted, even with pre-existing conditions) but don't anymore. I didn't think Walmart had health care benefits. :-D
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
noun 1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. In the post-MMY era, is the movement re-setting to become more socialistic? Look at the SBS Trust and Global Country now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Qu7a2lbkw or MUM as community. The old ownership form of the movement was to extract capital from the means of production and the community as a whole and transfer that to the East.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: http://fora.tv/2010/01/06/Raj_Patel_The_Value_of_Nothing#fullprogram
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Then again statistics is so aboundantly boring. Let's see shemp; for example; did you know that if you fathered a child in Scandinavia you as the father will have 6 months off from work to spend with your baby with 100% salary, paid for by the state ? Not to mention that your dear wife will have 9 months, or more, free from work with full salary and benefits ? Which ofcourse includes 100% free medical care, whether you are employed or not. Soscialism is an interesting conscept whether you like it or not.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) I saw a show on TV that discussed some study concluding that Norwegians were the happiest people in the world.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) I saw a show on TV that discussed some study concluding that Norwegians were the happiest people in the world. Depends on how you (they) define happiness. Drunks are happy too!
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Socialism is great...when you're on the receiving end. It's nothing but pubescent idealism from those who think feeling is superior to thinking and have largely, their heads in the clouds. It's been tried and has failed over and over again!! Merit is the best motivator. I can understand my nephew being for socialism, he has nothing.but student loans! People over 30 ought to know better by now, from the lessons of History.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
the problem with Socialism is, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money. M. Thatcher From: BillyG wg...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 3:09:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@.. . wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Socialism is great...when you're on the receiving end. It's nothing but pubescent idealism from those who think feeling is superior to thinking and have largely, their heads in the clouds. It's been tried and has failed over and over again!! Merit is the best motivator. I can understand my nephew being for socialism, he has nothing. but student loans! People over 30 ought to know better by now, from the lessons of History.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
You guys shouldn't have to worry about socialism. You won't have any money for them to run out of and will most likely be on the receiving end as the shit of the US economic collapse hits the fan. Got your check ready to pay off your share of the national debt? I didn't think so. Mike Dixon wrote: the problem with Socialism is, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money. M. Thatcher From: BillyG wg...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 3:09:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@.. . wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Socialism is great...when you're on the receiving end. It's nothing but pubescent idealism from those who think feeling is superior to thinking and have largely, their heads in the clouds. It's been tried and has failed over and over again!! Merit is the best motivator. I can understand my nephew being for socialism, he has nothing. but student loans! People over 30 ought to know better by now, from the lessons of History.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) I saw a show on TV that discussed some study concluding that Norwegians were the happiest people in the world. Let me guess: PBS?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Yes. I'd be happy to oblige. The following is from http://mises.org/daily/955 http://mises.org/daily/955 Sweden: Poorer Than You Think Mises Daily: Thursday, May 09, 2002 by William L. Anderson /articles.aspx?AuthorId=450 One of the enduring myths of the Third Way welfare state is that a nation as a whole can have a high standard of living--even if no one really has to work--as long as government transfers massive amounts of wealth from those who are well off to those who are less well off. For the past four decades, we have been inundated with news stories, books, and public commentary, all of which have exhorted us to be like Sweden. The Swedes, we have been told, enjoy free medical care, generous welfare benefits, time off from work, and subsidies for just about everything. When one counters that Swedes pay enormously high taxes, the standard reply is, That is true, but look at what they receive for their payments. According to a recent study, however, the cat is out of the bag. Relative to household in the United States, Swedish family income is considerably less. In fact, the study concludes, average income in Sweden is less than average income for black Americans, which comprise the lowest-income socioeconomic group in this country. The research came from the Swedish Institute of Trade, which, according to Reuters, compared official U.S. and Swedish statistics on household income as well as gross domestic product, private consumption and retail spending per capita between 1980 and 1999. The study used fixed prices and purchasing power parity adjusted data, and found that the median household income in Sweden at the end of the 1990s was the equivalent of $26,800, compared with a median of $39,400 for U.S. households. Furthermore, the study points out that Swedish productivity has fallen rapidly relative to per capital productivity in the USA. In defense of the Swedes, let me first say that simple comparisons of income can be deceiving. While I have never been to Sweden (even though I have relatives there), I would think that even the poorest sections of Stockholm and other Swedish cities are more livable and attractive than what one finds in many U.S. cities. Even with the high taxes, I think I would rather live in downtown Stockholm than in downtown Detroit or Newark. However, the study alerts us to something that is much more important, and that is that the European welfare states are not making their citizens wealthier. Over time, the cracks in these relatively wealthy nations are growing larger, and if the disease is not arrested, much of Europe will tumble off into real poverty in the not-so-distant future. Europeans--and, most likely, Americans--seem destined to learn the hard way that large, seemingly intractable welfare systems have their way of destroying the Goose that Laid the Golden Eggs. While people can debate the present condition of Swedes in Stockholm versus blacks in Harlem, there is a deep issue here that people seem to forget when it comes to welfare states: they are destructive at their roots. Advocates of welfarism concentrate only upon distribution while vilifying production. Such a state of affairs cannot go on forever as governments are forced to cannibalize their own capital structure over time in order to make the system to continue to work. The premises of the welfare state are as follows: (1) free markets, if not regulated by the state, lead to continuing inequality, as wealth becomes increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few people, while more and more people become poorer; (2) the only way to combat this problem is for the state to take a large portion of earnings from the wealthy and distribute it among others; and (3) such distribution actually enables the economy to grow, since growing concentration means that fewer people will have the ability to consume the products that are created within a private-market system. Karl Marx developed the first premise into his theories, calling this the internal contradiction of capitalism. However, the statement contains its own internal contradictions, as it creates an impossible scenario. As Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard have pointed out, in a private-market society, individuals cannot gain wealth unless they produce goods that are demanded by large numbers of people. For example, it was Henry Ford who became rich producing cars, not the producers of early luxury automobiles that were accessible
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Citation please? Yup. I posted an article with that statistic a few minutes ago. Or are you just whistling in the wind again? The wind is called Mariah and the whistler is Shemp. BTW, you didn't answer this question the other day: would you let your house burn than have the local fire department put out the fire? ???Why would I do that? I pay my taxes and expect the services. But even if I didn't pay taxes I would still expect the fire company to come and put out the fire. ShempMcGurk wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: http://fora.tv/2010/01/06/Raj_Patel_The_Value_of_Nothing#fullprogram
[FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: the problem with Socialism is, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money.  M. Thatcher ...which is happening to us now! There's a reason our relatively young president has gained so much gray hair in only a year! He realizes that we are spending way, way more than we are taking in...and he knows the gravy train can't last forever... From: BillyG wg...@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 3:09:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The word socialist: be afraid, be very, very afraid.  --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ . wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, ShempMcGurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Nablus must be from one of those silly socialistic Scandinavian countries. Well, if so, Nabby, it would be good for you to know that even at the very bottom of our recession, our lowest quintile is far, far better off than the middle class of any of your Scandinavian countries. Is that so, would you like to elaborate ? By some statistics perhaps ? ;-) Socialism is great...when you're on the receiving end. It's nothing but pubescent idealism from those who think feeling is superior to thinking and have largely, their heads in the clouds. It's been tried and has failed over and over again!! Merit is the best motivator. I can understand my nephew being for socialism, he has nothing. but student loans! People over 30 ought to know better by now, from the lessons of History.
