US Election 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.
buka001 said:
They took the property from Jewish people and gave it to German people. They upheld the property rights of Germans. This links back to what I said to Rietrot. They were the antitheses to Socialism.
Click to expand...
Your logic:
The Soviets never took property from people who were in good standing with the party, therefore by your definition, the communists protected private property rights.

And again, with an analogy. The ANC believes that all white people stole land. Therefore to "protect" property rights, they must steal property from white people and give it to black people.

Can you conclude that these parties protect property rights or do they protect it only for people who they like.
 
konfab said:
Your logic:
The Soviets never took property from people who were in good standing with the party, therefore by your definition, the communists protected private property rights.
Click to expand...
The wonderful world of Konfab whataboutism: buka001 describing Nazis as bad for taking property from Jews is directly equivalent to him supporting the Soviets doing the same.

The mental gymnastics are surprisingly agile in a man this old and out of training.
 
konfab said:
Your logic:
The Soviets never took property from people who were in good standing with the party, therefore by your definition, the communists protected private property rights.

And again, with an analogy. The ANC believes that all white people stole land. Therefore to "protect" property rights, they must steal property from white people and give it to black people.

Can you conclude that these parties protect property rights or do they protect it only for people who they like.
Click to expand...
Nobody owned property in USSR.

The three types of property were Private, Collective and Public.

Private Property was classed as small business or manufacturing entity owned by an individual or family.

Collective property was classed as a bigger entity or "corporation".

Public was of course state enterprises such as power stations etc.

So you are reaching incredibly far to class the dissolution of property rights of 0.75% of the German population as proof that the Nazis did not uphold property rights, similarly to how actual Socialist republics carried this out.

99% of the population retained their property rights.
 
konfab said:
Wut?
How is the state owning essential public goods not central planning?
Click to expand...
Because you can own the property but contract a private company to take it through the means of production in the capitalist form and give them a cut of the profits.

Example is the oil of Alaska. Owned by the state. Processed via private companies, oil sold in free markets, profits shared by private companies and the state (which distributes it to citizens in the form of UBI). Is this central planning? is Alaska a communist state now?

Another example is the intellectual property of a resource like water. You can own some quantity of water but in almost all countries you can't own the concept of water i.e. own all water.

Costa Rica tried to give property rights to the concept of water and auctioned it off to some American company. Lets just say that it didn't end well.

Or how about the colour blue... do you think that should be allowed to be copyrighted? If not are you against property rights.

My point with the whole table is that you guys are oversimplifying EVERYTHING.
 
Speedster said:
Simply wishing facts away doesn't change them from being facts. You can stick your head in the sand as much as you want, but all the names on that list are self proclaimed socialist states. Some, like the Nazis, were many other things too. My point is that Bernie labelling himself a socialist puts him in the same WhatsApp group as that list. If he differs greatly from them, them perhaps calling himself socialist isn't the best move.
Click to expand...
If one puts up a list of Democratic Countries is North Korea put there? Because they are self proclaimed as such?

Since you seem to be a connoisseur of the right wing libertarian economic think tank (The Misses Institute) views, so as a self proclaimed neutral actor, what economic views from left wing economic think tanks do you enjoy and support?
 
buka001 said:
If one puts up a list of Democratic Countries is North Korea put there? Because they are self proclaimed as such?

Since you seem to be a connoisseur of the right wing libertarian economic think tank (The Misses Institute) views, so as a self proclaimed neutral actor, what economic views from left wing economic think tanks do you enjoy and support?
Click to expand...
From the left, I like their commitment to welfare, although I have yet to see a truely viable financial model for such a large, diverse country. Norway, the poster child for centralised welfare, is far more homogenous which makes those types of policies much easier. As I said earlier, I am an unashamed capitalist, as were / are many of the prominent Democrats. The less a government intervenes, the better economies seem to work. I guess currently that makes me lean more right on economic policy, although I tend to lean left on some social issues.
 
Speedster said:
From the left, I like their commitment to welfare, although I have yet to see a truely viable financial model for such a large, diverse country. Norway, the poster child for centralised welfare, is far more homogenous which makes those types of policies much easier. As I said earlier, I am an unashamed capitalist, as were / are many of the prominent Democrats. The less a government intervenes, the better economies seem to work. I guess currently that makes me lean more right on economic policy, although I tend to lean left on some social issues.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Pretty much where I stand.
 
Speedster said:
From the left, I like their commitment to welfare, although I have yet to see a truely viable financial model for such a large, diverse country. Norway, the poster child for centralised welfare, is far more homogenous which makes those types of policies much easier. As I said earlier, I am an unashamed capitalist, as were / are many of the prominent Democrats. The less a government intervenes, the better economies seem to work. I guess currently that makes me lean more right on economic policy, although I tend to lean left on some social issues.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is actually a whole literature on this. Very uncomfortable reading for lefties though. The long and short of it is in multi-racial societies like the US, people don't like welfare being given to an 'out' group (usually defined by race) as compared to the 'in' group.
 
Roger Stone faces sentencing

Judge Amy Berman Jackson notes the DOJ's initial request of 7 to 9 years in prison for the Trump ally — which Barr retracted — has not been withdrawn

New prosecutor says Stone should go to prison for "a substantial period"

Despite the drama over whether Stone should receive the seven to nine years in prison the original Stone prosecutors recommended, the new prosecutor wants Stone to go to jail.

John Crabb Jr. said he wanted to apologize to the court for the confusion the Justice Department has caused with respect to this sentencing.

“This confusion was not caused by the original trial team,” he said. “The original trial team had authorization to submit” the original sentencing memo.

What this is all about: The prosecutors who tried the case against Stone wrote a memo asking for seven to nine years in prison — but Attorney General William Barr retracted that recommendation hours after Trump criticized it on Twitter for being too harsh. The four original prosecutors withdrew from the case in response to Barr's decision. Two new DC US Attorney's Office supervisors stepped up to handle Stone's sentencing, and a new sentencing memo was released asking for "far less" time.

Today, Crabb said he stands by the original sentencing memo, adding, “It was done in good faith.”

The Justice Department and US Attorney’s Office operate “without fear, favor or political influence. This prosecution is righteous.”

Crabb said he is not going to elaborate on who wrote the revised memo or say who directed him to write it, after the judge asked him directly. He would only say he signed the updated memo.

“The court will rely on its own sound judgment and experience,” Crabb said. “We have confidence the court will impose a just and fair sentence in this matter.”
 
Even Fake News™ is reporting Bloomberg's debate being a disaster.

And Platitude Pete is a disaster when it come to support from African Americans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X