Replies to post #487886 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[GEO928]

at this juncture, we're pretty much on the same page....from past conversations I believe our divergence is a matter of "extent"....

Adding that to our previous understanding that folks taking egregious advantage of the system are "crooks", not Capitalists or Socialists per se, and add also our agreement that Capitalism and Socialism are ideals, not workable "isms", where do we disagree?

where the extent comes into play is, perhaps, in the "definitions"......

while I tend to lump the left together in a conversational sense, I do not consider socialism to be the ideal....rather, I view socialism as more of a pragmatic compromise between the extremes/ideals of capitalism and communism.....

capitalism is profit driven...

communism is allocation based....

socialism.....uses the communist concept of government allocation and repackages it to fit into democratic profit centers as "re-distribution"...

we tend to muddle economic systems and social systems...

capitalism operates best under conditions of liberty & freedom....that environment we most commonly call democracy....

communism works best in a totalitarian environment....

so, our disagreement is "mixture" of capitalist tools and social programs and where the line exists which determines socio-economic success vs failure......

I claim a nation should employ as few social programs as possible....and give business the least encumbered operating environment.

[EZ2]

No link....as recd. from a friend via email. I also do not know who the author is.....but, I'd like to tell them: SPOT ON!

FOOLS everywhere you turn...!!! Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way you can understand them. This quote came from the Czech Republic. Someone over there has it figured out. We have a lot of work to do here in the United States of America......


"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president."
"The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.
The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool himself. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."