Endless Corporate Bailouts, None For The People

submitted by EndlessSunflowers from i.imgur.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (18 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

    There is no EITHER socialism or capitalism. They go hand in hand. Never has either existed in any nation without the other. Everybody's confusing socialism with communism and Marxism while they are utterly different.

    The only way for capitalism to continue benefiting society is through socialism. Socialism means curtailing the abuses allowed by unfettered capitalism. Such as for example, the "legal person" status of corporations: it is an abomination. Corporations can't go to jail, they just pay fines, which is incentive for profitable anti-social behavior. Revoke the legal person status of corporations and suddenly the managers are PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE for what their corporations do. Whole different ball game.

    Then make laws that prevent corporations from underpaying employees. And so on. But those would be in the interest of SOCIETY (from which the name "socialism" is derived) and has nothing to do with communism and or Marixsm.

    It's like everybody's talking about this stuff with half their words missing.

    [–][deleted]  (16 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

      Wrong. Politics and brainwashing got to you dude.

      I. Definition

      Socialism is an economic philosophy based on the need for regulations on capitalism. Unchecked capitalism, most economists agree, can create serious problems in the long term, since short-term personal profit does not motivate companies to take care of infrastructure, the environment, or their workers. Socialists emphasize this fact and argue that only the government can solve the problems created by capitalism. Other economic philosophies generally acknowledge the problem, but advocate other solutions to it, while only a few extremists deny that there is any problem with absolute capitalism.

      Although many people think that socialism and capitalism are completely incompatible systems, the fact is that most developed nations operate on a combination of both. For example, nearly every major city in the developed world has some system of government-run public transportation, such as bus lines or a subway. There are also laws against child labor, unsafe workplaces, and reckless pollution, and government programs that help provide education, food, and healthcare to the poor. All of these are socialist ideas that exist in relative harmony with capitalist economies. Capitalism vs. socialism is a question of balance, not an “either/or” question.

      Source

      [–][deleted]  (11 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

        Yes I know. That was subverted by communist propaganda long ago. You have not been paying attention, have you? I'm an economist, so it's my job to know these things. The definition you are using is COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA.

        [–][deleted]  (9 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

          There are already words for what you call "socialism" and which is not that: Marxist-Leninist doctrine, communism, and more.

          The term "socialism" predates Marx by a century or so at least. Its original meaning has been removed in order to operate an Orwellian mind-control language distortion operation which is working amazingly well, as evidenced by your own reaction.

          [–][deleted]  (7 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

            My definition IS THE ORIGINAL DEFINITION. Defining socialism as Marxist-Leninist IS COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA.

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

            In Marxist Socialism, society doesn't own property, the state does. The state creates a false narrative of "collective owning property" and doesn't define who or what the so called "collective" is. That is why in nearly every Marxist state, "collective" ends up being the (((government))) and the people end up suffering while the goverment agents become fatter.

            Read some Robert Owen you retard

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

            There is no Marxist socialism. It's communism. Only Marx himself described his horrors as "a natural evolution of socialism" when in fact it is diametrically opposite. But socialism used to mean something elevated and respectable back then. So here comes Marx and pushes the idea that his horrors are the extension of these elevated and respectable ideas. Fast forward 90 years, and all of a sudden "socialism" is a dirty word.

            [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

            This exactly, jews ruin everything they touch, but I disagree with one of your points. I hate Marx and marxists, but I have read "Capital A Critique of Political Economy" and in the book, the bearded jew describes "communism" as a "way to achieve marxism". So technically, you are incorrect, as, in the words of the bearded jew, Communism is a way to achieve Marxism, but realistically, you are correct, because most marxist countries end up being Marxist-Leninist or "Communist".