White people...

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Of course socialist have to account for the past failures of the applications of socialism. You guys wiggle all you want but regardless of how authoritarian those regimes were their economic theory was socialism. They went bankrupt except where they integrated capitalism heavily like in China.

You can make a sweeping generalization about anything if you ignore enough detail and complexity. Here, watch this:

Consider presidencies of George W. Bush and Richard Nixon.

Of course conservatives have to account for the past failures of the applications of conservatism. You guys wiggle all you want but regardless of how moderate those presidents were their economic theory was fiscal conservatism. They both did nothing but fuck up the country except where they integrated liberalism heavily like in the establishment of the EPA.

See now isn't that just retarded? Detail and nuance matters. Fact of the matter is, there are profound differences between the Soviet Union and the United States, just like between the United States and Sweden. Imagine that!

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You can make a sweeping generalization about anything if you ignore enough detail and complexity. Here, watch this:

Consider presidencies of George W. Bush and Richard Nixon.

Of course conservatives have to account for the past failures of the applications of conservatism. You guys wiggle all you want but regardless of how moderate those presidents were their economic theory was fiscal conservatism. They both did nothing but fuck up the country except where they integrated liberalism heavily like in the establishment of the EPA.

See now isn't that just retarded? Detail and nuance matters.

Hey I agree the morons who voted for those people are accountable as are the establishment conservatives who allowed Trotskyites to hijack their party because they bought into a conservative branding scheme. What does that have to do with a proven failure of an economic theory like socialism?

You are saying that people ran under the premise of implementing fiscal conservatism but its easily shown that they did not implement those policies where as the soviets and other socialist systems did implement socialism and it lead to the corruption you use as an excuse for their undoing because long term socialism isnt a viable system.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hey I agree the morons who voted for those people are accountable as are the establishment conservatives who allowed Trotskyites to hijack their party because they bought into a conservative branding scheme. What does that have to do with a proven failure of an economic theory like socialism?

You are saying that people ran under the premise of implementing fiscal conservatism but its easily shown that they did not implement those policies where as the soviets and other socialist systems did implement socialism and it lead to the corruption you use as an excuse for their undoing because long term socialism isnt a viable system.

The "socialism" implemented by FDR during the New Deal, and defended/sustained by Eisenhower in the 1950's, was arguably more socialist than the kleptocracy they had going in the Soviet Union.

Get it through your head that people advocating for Democratic Socialism is much different than they socialism they tried to implement in Russia. Nobody is advocating that workers own the means of production as a rule, only that we have a mixed market that is a little more mixed and a little less market.

[Raev]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Consider presidencies of George W. Bush and Richard Nixon.

Of course conservatives have to account for the past failures of the applications of conservatism. You guys wiggle all you want but regardless of how moderate those presidents were their economic theory was fiscal conservatism. They both did nothing but fuck up the country except where they integrated liberalism heavily like in the establishment of the EPA

I am not a fan of either Bush or Nixon. But let's not forget that both of them inherited a gigantic pile of steaming shit from their Democratic predecessors. Nixon came in after Johnson had started a massive war in Vietnam and had pressured the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates low. As Austrian theory would predict, this boom lead to the bust in the 70s and stagflation etc. Bush came in after Clinton had freshly repealed Glass-Steagall and the banks were already busy building a time bomb of mortgage backed securities.

Now you can argue both of them made things worse. Nixon took us off the gold standard, and keeping the US dollar relevant meant sucking up to Saudi Arabia. Bush pushed for more home ownership, appointed Greenspan who cut rates after the 2001 dotcom crash, and took us into Iraq. Neither of them were particularly competent.

The point is it's much more reasonable to say that the failure of the Soviet Union with socialism reflects poorly than the failure of two random presidents (who aren't even in full control of the government) does on capitalism.

[Maner]

They say the number one way to not be poor for your entire life in this country contains just two parts. They are to, finish high school, and to not have a kid before you're married. Has absolutely nothing to do with race in this country.

[Pokesan]

dont argue with libertarians

[Nihilist_santa]

Detroit also adopted liberal policies and had democrat leaders. If you look into it the issue its more than just manufacturing leaving. Its the political direction the city took and its policies. The great thing about the US is each state can act as a laboratory and we can watch this without infecting the rest of the country with its failed policies.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Detroit also adopted liberal policies and had democrat leaders. If you look into it the issue its more than just manufacturing leaving. Its the political direction the city took and its policies. The great thing about the US is each state can act as a laboratory and we can watch this without infecting the rest of the country with its failed policies.

Silicon valley and Seattle WA also adopted liberal policies, are both became booming centers of industry while Detroit sank. Obviously it's bigger than policy, and more due to industrial trends. Both Seattle and S.F dealt more in advanced manufacturing that wasn't hit as hard. You claim it's not because of manufacturing leaving, but I just don't see good reasoning there. Red states all over the US have fared awfully, except Texas, which might as well be member of OPEC.

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Silicon valley and Seattle WA also adopted liberal policies, are both became booming centers of industry while Detroit sank. Obviously it's bigger than policy, and more due to industrial trends. Both Seattle and S.F dealt more in advanced manufacturing that wasn't hit as hard. You claim it's not because of manufacturing leaving, but I just don't see good reasoning there. Red states all over the US have fared awfully, except Texas, which might as well be member of OPEC.

Newsflash they haven't stopped making automobiles they just moved to right to work states in the south and Mexico. They were driven there by the economic climate of Detroit and its relationship to the unions (corruption, cronyism, etc all of the things you blame for the failings of other leftist systems that haven't actualized the dream)

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Newsflash they haven't stopped making automobiles they just moved to right to work states in the south and Mexico. They were driven there by the economic climate of Detroit and its relationship to the unions (corruption, cronyism, etc all of the things you blame for the failings of other leftist systems that haven't actualized the dream)

This is a map of right-to-work states. What do you notice about them?

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They are all the shittiest, poorest states! Let's, as a nation, become more like the deep South!

Unions are responsible for nearly all the nice perks you enjoy today, like sick days, vacation, health and safety regulations, worker's compensation, benefits, etc, all these nice things that are slowly being eroded because of people like you defending the Bossman. Public sector unions obviously have problems. Some unions are corrupt. Unions, as a concept, are necessary.