Should LOW IQ Persons Be Invountarily STERILIZED

[jordanriver]

Logic leaps are bad things.

Arguing that prominent Soviets were actually capitalists is just bizarre. For most of them power, not economics, seems to have been the driving force.

In any case, an economic system without an adequate political bridle is just a half broken horse waiting for the chance to take the bit.

NO NO NO NO NO NO


Quit misrepresenting me.

NOT ALL THE PROMINENT SOVIETS



I specifically pointed out THE INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERS , Orwell's Napoleon and Squealer


.....you use the same tactics anti-Christians use when they cite Torquemada and Hitler to argue ...."All Christians..."

[jordanriver]

"Way too often" = 100% of the time. When it comes to establishing a tryanny, communisn has a perfect track record.

an American throwing stones in a glass house

[Teallaura]

NO NO NO NO NO NO


Quit misrepresenting me.

NOT ALL THE PROMINENT SOVIETS



I specifically pointed out THE INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERS , Orwell's Napoleon and Squealer


.....you use the same tactics anti-Christians use when they cite Torquemada and Hitler to argue ...."All Christians..."

And Rogue cited which prominent Soviets they correspond to (or are believed to) - Soviet capitalist is almost an oxymoron and arguing that any of those guys were really capitalists is just bizarre.

I don't doubt that few Soviets were True Believers - but that doesn't make them capitalists.

[jordanriver]

And Rogue cited which prominent Soviets they correspond to (or are believed to) - Soviet capitalist is almost an oxymoron and arguing that any of those guys were really capitalists is just bizarre.

I don't doubt that few Soviets were True Believers - but that doesn't make them capitalists.

WHAT?????

They trade for profit.

At the end the book , Orwell even says they are the same as the humans , and the humans represented the Western "Democracies" capitalists.

....for freaks sakes, they even SOLD the most decent character of the book loyal workhorse BOXER , to the knackers (glue factory)

[Teallaura]

The Soviet economy was never 'non-profit' - their industries traded abroad as well as internally for, you guessed it, profit. The economy was a badly mixed bag of assigned resources and sold resources. Granted, the planning so mucked up production that they were never very profitable, but they certainly traded with that as a goal.

When Western nations weren't shipping them humanitarian aid.

Five year plans included wholesale and some retail pricing. The Soviet system was about state ownership of capital resources - and it actually worked fairly well for heavy industry where planning was easy. But where feedback was essential (consumer goods) they did abysmally bad. And even heavy industry had an internal barter system to overcome the planning limitations.

Had it not been for the profits they were making from natural resources (oil/gas) the system wouldn't have lasted as long as it did.

[rogue06]

The Soviet economy was never 'non-profit' - their industries traded abroad as well as internally for, you guessed it, profit. The economy was a badly mixed bag of assigned resources and sold resources. Granted, the planning so mucked up production that they were never very profitable, but they certainly traded with that as a goal.

When Western nations weren't shipping them humanitarian aid.

Five year plans included wholesale and some retail pricing. The Soviet system was about state ownership of capital resources - and it actually worked fairly well for heavy industry where planning was easy. But where feedback was essential (consumer goods) they did abysmally bad. And even heavy industry had an internal barter system to overcome the planning limitations.

Had it not been for the profits they were making from natural resources (oil/gas) the system wouldn't have lasted as long as it did.

My 6th grade teacher was a communist. She kept telling us that we were doomed to fail and the Soviets to succeed because they had the foresight to plan their economy.

[jordanriver]

The Soviet economy was never 'non-profit' - their industries traded abroad as well as internally for, you guessed it, profit. The economy was a badly mixed bag of assigned resources and sold resources. Granted, the planning so mucked up production that they were never very profitable, but they certainly traded with that as a goal.

When Western nations weren't shipping them humanitarian aid.

Five year plans included wholesale and some retail pricing. The Soviet system was about state ownership of capital resources - and it actually worked fairly well for heavy industry where planning was easy. But where feedback was essential (consumer goods) they did abysmally bad. And even heavy industry had an internal barter system to overcome the planning limitations.

Had it not been for the profits they were making from natural resources (oil/gas) the system wouldn't have lasted as long as it did.

so it wasn't Marxist after all

Source: COMMUNIST MANIFESTO Chapter II Marx and Engels

source

© Copyright Original Source

[jordanriver]

When Western nations weren't shipping them humanitarian aid.

.

that explains why we have such a big surplus and no national debt!

there are only a few communist countries and of course all the Capitalist countries didn't need any humanitarian aid, after all, they could take care of themselves because they had the guaranteed success of Capitalism!

im getting smarter already

(that was sarcasm, ....unfortunately its necessary to explain because I know somebody is going to seriously correct me about the natl debt/surplus thing)

[lilpixieofterror]

are you bipolar?

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

you defend Americans one minute.

and the next minute you suggest Americans are capable of Russian-style and Cambodian-style and North Korean-style atrocities

Because Americans are no worse or better than any other group of people. Most people contain the ability to do good or to do evil. When you recognize that aspect of human nature, you come to understand why socialism has always been a total and complete failure, every time it's been tried.

[lilpixieofterror]

no.
This thread refers TO THE USA, which was pointed out in the first post,
(I cited other countries only to show that its been done)

Most Americans are like you, showing nothing but contempt for people you suspect are low IQ.

Low IQ people will never get a break in AMERICA when it is considered normal to bully them and deny them access to EQUAL resources.

And their children will start with a disadvantage economically,

....and laugh nervously when they other kids debase others as a joke the COMMON AMERICAN EXPRESSION "...and would you like fries with your order" reminding them they are supposed to be ashamed of their parents. ...that their parents must be "retard", "dimbulb" "sped" (pick your favorite)

I have never once, called a person who seriously is mentally handicapped, retarded, but do keep trying JR.

[lilpixieofterror]

that explains why we have such a big surplus and no national debt!

there are only a few communist countries and of course all the Capitalist countries didn't need any humanitarian aid, after all, they could take care of themselves because they had the guaranteed success of Capitalism!

im getting smarter already

(that was sarcasm, ....unfortunately its necessary to explain because I know somebody is going to seriously correct me about the natl debt/surplus thing)

The major reason that the US is building up such a large government debt is because the US keeps flirting with socialism.

[Cow Poke]

there are only a few communist countries...

Yeah, ever wonder why that is?

And one of the most prominent is North Korea. Maybe next time Dennis Rodman goes to visit his little buddy, you can go and stay there!

Kim.jpg

I think I'll get my hair cut like that!

[jordanriver]

I don't think that word means what you think it means.


.

"fickle" is sexist

[Catholicity]

jr Is throwing that accusation out at me for calling him a "dimwit." Its called a "persecution" complex. I knew someone else that had it. Unfortunately it leads to a very long and Unhappy life.

[Teallaura]

so it wasn't Marxist after all

Source: COMMUNIST MANIFESTO Chapter II Marx and Engels

source

© Copyright Original Source

So, it attempted to be Marxist - which may tell us more about the impracticality of Marxism than any latent capitalist dreams of theirs.