So I am new. What does this server think about Socialism?

Where do you stand @jeff4121999 ?

I am of the position, in fairness, that it is both inefficient and violates property rights.

Woah! Is that a thing in austrailia?

Wow.

I side with Bastiat. Socialism is a violation of people's property rights, which are inherent human rights.

^I am stating his view, not asserting it as fact, BTW

it's a philosophical argument, so open to discussion

Because self interest drives everyone anywhere, not just in capitalism. Capitalism merely tries to direct self interest (greed) to constructive ends through the rule of law.

where as socialsim concentrates power and opens it up to abuse

Oh, and there is issues where cronyism distorts the rule of law in a capitalist society. I would admit that.

@jeff4121999 I don't mean to sound like an entitled American, but that is mind boggling to me. Is there any sort of legal representation for this type of thing?

@jeff4121999 haha!

@jeff4121999 I thought they banned firearms? or was that just a buy back?

@Minimarshmallo As for the climate, the single largest influence is the big burning ball of gas in the sky.

And that's how they treat their veterans?

That's incredible.

I have wondered, how do military coalitions work? How much interaction is there between units of different nations?

Sorry, I am assuming you served in the Middle East? Did you have any interaction with other Western forces?

I have been researching foreign policy regarding terrorism. How do you think western countries could improve their strategy?

I think you have a bit of a right to be biased.

Almost 400 Million. We have a population of 330 million, and it seems like half of that support gun control

about 100 Million gun owning households.

Fairly.

Especially on issues of security and economics

no, I do agree with most on the right? what specifically?

Ahh okay.

What about trade? Free trade, tariffs?

@jeff4121999 Why is that?

@Minimarshmallo What is it about socialism that you like?

@jeff4121999 kinda, I guess. So would you support some level of tariffs on imports, or other limits on trade>

?

So a tariff is basically a sales tax, but for imports. I don't like it when the government uses sales taxes to influence what I buy. In New York, they put extra taxes on large sodas to fight obesity.

I wish, but I can't at the moment.

its 1 in the morning in the US

I should probably knock off anyway. It's great chatting though.

Haha! I love the "mate." I am not southern, but I'll talk to y'all later.

@Tyberius D I am curious, what was the data for the graph? And what is it measuring? I am also curious as to why the countries in orange and red would need more socialism.

But as for the balance between capitalism and socialism, I see it like this: as Bastiat says, we all have a basic right to own property, and to dispose of it how we wish. That is where a capitalist free market comes from.

There are some cases were, in the interest of protecting property more effectively, individuals form collective groups to better provide for certain needs. You identified these as things like roads, public safety, and also national defense.

As part of the arrangement, individuals give up some of the property for these public goods, but the arrangement is not universal. It actually defeats the point if this model is extended to everything.

@Tyberius D To get back to the main issue, your basic contention is that countries that have less ability to generate capital are better off under socialism, right?

@Tyberius D I would generally see this as non-essential to the argument. All countries must have the ability to produce something, regardless of difficulty. In general, i think that production is better facilitated by a capitalist system. Further, it creates incentives for entrepreneurship, which helps to make countries more productive. I don't see how socialism creates entrepreneurs.

Sorry dude!

@Tyberius D Okay, then I think we would probably agree in theory, perhaps not in practice. I definitely would agree that there are sectors of an economy that would need to be controlled by a government because the free market wouldn't sufficiently address it. Public safety and roads are examples of public goods that are only provided for by a government.

The debate comes down to which sectors should be government controlled and which should be allowed to operate under the free market. Health care is a good example of such contention.

On the contrary, communism is what dominates most families. One or two people are forced to do most of the work, the rest of the worthless population eats their food and sleeps under their roof.

@atheist4thecause What is the cause and effect relationship?

Not that I doubt your point. I fundamentally agree that there is a point to both a father and a mother in a family, beyond just the required male and female for reproduction.

are we talking about the Bible or the Koran here?

I mean, I have read excerpts of a translation

and are we talking Koran or Bible

?

'kay.

I mean, you can disagree with the interpretation, but you can also look at the effects.

The high rates of radicalization into the 21st century is a bad track record.

I mean, its a far cry from "love your neighbors as yourself."

which was the second greatest commandment for christians to follow.

Now, the five pillars of islam are different. They are something like Faith, Fasting, Prayer, Almsgiving, and Pilgrimage. The problem is when faith gets taken too far.

Not always. There was the crusade

in response to muslim attack

but generally yeah

Just saying that no body's perfect

Okay. Intersting.

haha. I couldn't

##LwC

Although, frankly, its more like a benevolent dictatorship

mostly benevolent*

exaclty

i love the story of Plymouth plantation whenever we talk about communism\

the pilgrims in Plymouth originally started out as a commune. Everyone got lazy and a bunch of people starved or got sick. So William Bradford took over and basically said, "unless you work, you won't eat" and they had their most prosperous year yet.

this is back in the 1600s, before marx

@The Lemon that's an Economic issue how?

and the answer you're gonna get is that they are the result of an alternative path that was also evolutionarily fit enough to survie.

survive.

haha

I think there are going to be plenty of examples of discrepancies. The question is if differences are the result of discrimination or self determination.

@The Lemon Yeah. Sometimes I wonder if he intentionally makes mistakes like "Smocking gun"

Not sure if is to get the attention, or to distract from the larger issue

And the periodic "WITCH HUNT!" tweets

Okay, I think this somewhat in the wrong thread, but everything applies to trump now so it’s okay.

The first thing that should be noted is that sex is a biological structure. Humans and most other mammals, as well as lots of other species, exist as either male or female. Those are the two default states.

There will, of course, be genetic complications. These exceptions are just that: exceptions to the rule, not a rule itself. It’s an exception in the same way twins are deviations from the norm.

So, two biological sexes.

Now, in my understanding, males and females have biological differences. Most notably, females can develop offspring.

Because this is where this debate is happening, @Murkle

And it is tangentially related to Trump, because everything is.

Danke.

Has this thread addressed the issue of status of the child yet? Because that is something that is crucial to an abortion discussion.

As in, do you believe the child is a life, not a life, or a life, but of less value than the mother, etc?

Kk. Anyone who wants to respond, @ me in the gender issues thread.

I am curious, do you think there is a way for these problems to self correct through the natural laws of the economics? Will there come a point where the social costs naturally turn into incentives for better, cleaner products?

And also, I have read from sources like the economist that as CO2 levels rise, the earth becomes more green. Plant growth increases. This helps to regulate the excess CO2.

The BLM slogan is a political misdirection. It claims that there is a widespread disregard for the current problems that plague predominately black communities, and blames this on the right wing.

Yet almost every major city is largely Left-leaning, many are extremely so. (This is true if you look at the 2016 county by county election map).

So these broken cities are perpetuated by the leftist governments of these cities.

In a sterile situation, no body. The context would certainly change things, especially if emotions are involved. In that case, it’s not as much the words themselves but the attitudes behind them.

But people don’t recognize that with the N-word.

@Deleted User that is a bit of a straw man. There is a difference between a gamete and a zygote, namely one is half a genome and the other is a distinct human cell.

Haha okay.

I am bad about gauging sarcasm sometimes.

👏

I have been reliably informed that being a male doesn't mean you are a man. Some men are female.

S/o to SvenComputer

and what pronoun?

@Tyberius D do I detect sarcasm?

@Tyberius D yep they are off the charts now.

So what was the main question of this discussion

Oooh.