1 edit
@zahlanzi saidThat's exactly what I explained to him zahlooney, for shag doody there's only capitalism or socialism and for him everything has to slot into one or the other.
First of all, it bears repeating that the donkey has no idea what he is talking about and he calls everything to the left of him socialism. From Germany to Norway to Venezuela to North fukin Korea, everything is socialism
Posted: 11 Apr '23 07:55
Quoting my good self:
"The limit of shag doody's reasoning, if it's not socialism it must be capitalism, and if it's not capitalism it must be socialism."
Bonus quote:
"Men cannot be enslaved politically until they have been disarmed ideologically. When they are so disarmed, it is the victims who take the lead in the process of their own destruction." Ayn Rand
@zahlanzi saidOh, you are mistaken.
First of all, it bears repeating that the donkey has no idea what he is talking about and he calls everything to the left of him socialism. From Germany to Norway to Venezuela to North fukin Korea, everything is socialism
"Socialism can have no unemployment.
It is, per definition, a social ownership of production. "
That's the communism flavour of socialism or the ...[text shortened]... oes through his skull at any given moment and we know damn well anything we explain will never stick
Unemployment seems a social measure, but it’s not. It’s to stop the masses getting too rowdy.
There are plenty of jobs to be done. Capitalism deems them non-profitable for the rich, so they’re not considered jobs.
@shavixmir said"Unemployment seems a social measure, but it’s not. It’s to stop the masses getting too rowdy."
Oh, you are mistaken.
Unemployment seems a social measure, but it’s not. It’s to stop the masses getting too rowdy.
There are plenty of jobs to be done. Capitalism deems them non-profitable for the rich, so they’re not considered jobs.
Like I said, that can be said of every social measure, program, whatever you want to call it. Anything that helps the people can be interpreted as "something to keep the masses from revolting against the capitalists" to the point where the term social program is rendered pointless.
Free education? Keep the masses from revolting because they can't afford it and therefore can't access the better paying jobs. Free healthcare? Keep the masses from revolting because their loved ones are dying. Pensions? Keep the masses from revolting because ... and so on.
Unemployment is a social program by definition and "keeping masses from revolting", like you so dramatically put it, is just a consequence.
"There are plenty of jobs to be done"
No there are not. Right now we have unemployment AND we keep people in jobs that could be done by robots or in shifts that could be half as short. Giving someone a shovel and paying them to dig a hole then paying someone else to fill that hole up is not "providing jobs"
@zahlanzi saidEducation for all is a socialist policy. Yes.
"Unemployment seems a social measure, but it’s not. It’s to stop the masses getting too rowdy."
Like I said, that can be said of every social measure, program, whatever you want to call it. Anything that helps the people can be interpreted as "something to keep the masses from revolting against the capitalists" to the point where the term social program is rendered pointles ...[text shortened]... and paying them to dig a hole then paying someone else to fill that hole up is not "providing jobs"
Union rights. Yes.
Health & Safety. Yes.
Unemployment benefit. No.
To a certain degree one could argue that unemployment insurance of sorts stemmed from the guilds, etc. in Europe.
And one, could possibly argue that the UK may have adopted unemployment benefit from a social perspective (pre-WW1), but even that’s pushing it.
The vast majority of countries implemented it after the Russian revolution when the plebs were getting all uppity about the poverty they were flopping around in.
However, the guild system aside, only capitalist economies have unemployment benefit.
@athousandyoung saidOr send them out with a lawnmower to mow neighbors lawns for cash.
Teach them about capitalism; charge them rent and throw them out if they can’t pay
Seemed like a "win-win" every time I did that as a kid.
1 edit
@shavixmir saidEvery developed nation in the world is a capitalist economy, including those regarded as socialist paradigms like Norway.
However, the guild system aside, only capitalist economies have unemployment benefit.
1 edit
@shavixmir saidI get that but the term "only capitalist countries" seems odd since that applies to every developed nation on earth.
Norway is capitalist.
They have social programmes.
@shavixmir saidyou have a weird ambition to put unemployment benefits in a different category for no reason at all.
Education for all is a socialist policy. Yes.
Union rights. Yes.
Health & Safety. Yes.
Unemployment benefit. No.
To a certain degree one could argue that unemployment insurance of sorts stemmed from the guilds, etc. in Europe.
And one, could possibly argue that the UK may have adopted unemployment benefit from a social perspective (pre-WW1), but even that’s pushing i ...[text shortened]... around in.
However, the guild system aside, only capitalist economies have unemployment benefit.
pretty much every characteristic all the other socialist policies you mentioned is present in unemployment as well. Every country's wiki page of social benefits has a section saying what unemployment benefits they offer and under what conditions.
Don't know what to tell you mah dude, it's a weird stance to take.
"The vast majority of countries implemented it after the Russian revolution when the plebs were getting all uppity about the poverty they were flopping around in."
lolwut? you think the Russian revolution happened because there was too much unemployment?
@zahlanzi saidDon’t be silly.
you have a weird ambition to put unemployment benefits in a different category for no reason at all.
pretty much every characteristic all the other socialist policies you mentioned is present in unemployment as well. Every country's wiki page of social benefits has a section saying what unemployment benefits they offer and under what conditions.
Don't know what to te ...[text shortened]... und in."
lolwut? you think the Russian revolution happened because there was too much unemployment?
Poverty, hunger, unrest, a ruling class which didn’t pay attention to the needs of the poorer population, etc.
And that revolution was spreading. Or, the dynamics of it were, so the ruling classes (that being the capitalists in the West) had to let loose a little… give the dog a bone as it were.
Things like minimum wages and unemployment benefit. Placate the masses, to steer off a revolt.
When you look at the dynamics of capitalism (like dialectic materialism), it becomes apparant that it’s going to either stretch or snap. The ruling classes chose for to stretch; inherent in the capitalist system.
From the socialist movement came things like unions, work place standards, etc.
Obviously, there’s some give or take on all acounts. Yes, as a socialist you’re pro unemployment benefit as opposed to no unemployment benefit. And I suppose one could argue that the dynamics of capitalism, since it will end in communism, will either reach that goal via socialism or snapping like an elastic band; in which you could say that the “water in the wine” approach is communism doing its work.
I oppose that vision on dialectic grounds. The inherent opposites and friction within capitalism creates unemployment benefit, not the goal into which it will mutate.
@zahlanzi saidIdiot!!!! How do you think billionaire Buffet pays 20% in tax? He structures his ‘income’ so that it might be tax free, or maybe not taxed at all, such as municipal bonds.
"when we get to choose our own amount to pay in taxes."
how the fuk do you choose the tax amount. Are you admitting to tax evasion here?
"I am trying to show you libs what freedom is all about"
You have no idea what freedom is. You're, on average, the least free first world country.
Yes I get around big tax by legal sheltering. Whew. Libs.
You Cannot BELIEVE that I can do that, right? But now that you know that I can, you must reassess and realize I certainly have Freedom,
Great, we are on the same page, and will possibly bring along a few more liberals who are confused.
Oh, what does on average mean, and what does that sentence have to do with this issue? You liberals are unbelievable with your dancing all over the place.
1 edit
@shavixmir saidI do NOT think unemployment benefit is socialistic . People who work pay into it. Jesus.
Capitlaism taxes.
Socialism taxes.
Just different causes and goal groups who benefit.
Don’t kid yourself.
Now, back to your OP.
How do you plan to embolden your kids against socialism, when you don’t understand the very concept?
You think unemployment benefit, for example, is socialistic. I’ve tried to explain to you why it’s not; it’s a relief valve in capitalis ...[text shortened]... rent to to socialism and, if they heed your words, they’ll bring about that very thing you so dread.
Did you say in Socialism that there is no unemployment? Tell us how people feed off of each other on the same level, with no entrepreneurship no way to get ahead. Tell us how a guy with no children is somehow equal to a guy with five children. This could get interesting. And at what age do you force people to work, since there is no unemployment. Another interesting question. And how do you force people to work that do not want to work? And how do you make people who want to work a lot not work anymore than the next guy? These are very simple questions that you will not answer.
@shavixmir saidUnemployment benefit is not Socialism. Welfare where the government just gives money to the needy, and to the losers, is socialist. Looks like I am doing the teaching here.
Socialism can have no unemployment.
It is, per definition, a social ownership of production.
To sum it up nicely, let me paraphrase Saint-Simonianism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Hence that unionism and voting rights for women, etc. can be considered socialist, but unemployment benefit cannot.
Obviously, I dare suggest that ...[text shortened]... point of me pointing this out to Average Joe is to help him think about critique before offering it.
@shavixmir saidYou keep repeating unemployment is a measure to "placate the masses" and not a socialist program yet you haven't addressed one bit why all the rest, like education, healthcare, pensions, child support, etc are in fact socialist programs but not capitalist measures to placate the masses.
Don’t be silly.
Poverty, hunger, unrest, a ruling class which didn’t pay attention to the needs of the poorer population, etc.
And that revolution was spreading. Or, the dynamics of it were, so the ruling classes (that being the capitalists in the West) had to let loose a little… give the dog a bone as it were.
Things like minimum wages and unemployment benefit. Pl ...[text shortened]... and friction within capitalism creates unemployment benefit, not the goal into which it will mutate.
It's like saying Ferraris are means of transportation but they are not cars. Only Volvos are cars
This is a weird conversation and I want out of it.