WWII, Nazis Communists and other stuff

[Brisketexan 104465]

Just now, Bevo said:

In your mind, what is the difference between socialism and progressivism? To me there is a sliding scale of any belief whereby each person sees themselves or their leaders differently than others see them.

I'd look mostly to our Western European allies.  Whatever they have done is generally compatible with a capitalist system and a functioning democracy.  I mean, that's an easy short answer.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

On 8/7/2020 at 2:20 PM, Onboard 2.0 said:

Everyone one of your posts has been written to make it seem like the USSR was something  they were not.  

Uncle Joe, it's his moniker... so much for your knowledge of history.  I'll put my general knowledge of world history up against yours any day. Pick a topic brah.....

The Soviet Union killed 20 million of its own citizens. Mao very probably killed more. Nazi Germany caused WWII for damn sure, but make no mistake all 3 regimes are in a 3 way tie in many categories of worst regimes, and political systems in history.. 

You aren't triggering anything with me regarding the USSR, and their defeat of Hitler. Yes they played a big part, they sure as hell didn't defeat them single handedly. Hitler defeated himself in 42 when he began fighting a multi front war. He split his forces in 3 locations Africa, Europe, and Eurasia (Russia).  

The USSR was basically fighting a single front war, and relied on tons of material from the US. (fighting a war on 2 fronts as well).  You can say the USSR finally beat a beleaguered Nazi Germany, but you aren't telling the entire story.  

In addition to all the materials provided -- including all the trucks that allowed them to move supplies -- the US and Britain also did basically all the bombing of German industry.  The USSR doesn't win shit without the US and Brits.  The US and Brits beat Germany regardless of the Bolsheviks.  We had the air, sea, and the bomb.

No doubt a lot more Americans would have died.  But we win against Germany regardless.  Soviets would lose without our supplies, the other fronts, and without Brits and the Americans bombing the shit out of Germany.

[BabaYaga 15202]

2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

As I see it, if Sweden went from a socialist state to a capitalist dreamscape in 40 years, then why do what Sweden did? I'm gonna take a big guess and say other states will figure this out as well.

Sweden moved away from their failed socialist policies in the 70's and 80's and moved from being a has-been state to one of the richest countries on the planet expressly by embracing free-market ideas.  For example, if we did that they did here, it would look a lot like this:

 

1. More free trade

2. A more deregulated product market

3. No Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

4. The abolition of occupational licensing and minimum wage laws

5. The abolition of taxes on property, gifts, and inheritance

6. Even after the recent tax cut, America would still have to slightly reduce its corporate tax

7. America would need to reform Social Security from defined benefits to defined contributions and introduce private accounts

8. The US would also need to adopt a comprehensive school voucher system where private schools get the same per‐pupil funding as public ones.

 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

In addition to all the materials provided -- including all the trucks that allowed them to move supplies -- the US and Britain also did basically all the bombing of German industry.  The USSR doesn't win shit without the US and Brits.  The US and Brits beat Germany regardless of the Bolsheviks.  We had the air, sea, and the bomb.

No doubt a lot more Americans would have died.  But we win against Germany regardless.  Soviets would lose without our supplies, the other fronts, and without Brits and the Americans bombing the shit out of Germany.

Very true, I seem to remember the US giving the Russians the loan of many ships during the war only to get them back compete destroyed thru mis use.  The Russians did keep Germany very occupied on the eastern front.  Had Hitler focussed his forces on Russia in 39 or 40 the outcome could have been very different.  Or had he not turned south during Barbarosa to secure oil fields he may have had Moscow before the Winter set in. Lots of ins, and outs, and what have you's in that war.

 

[hayden_horn 11360]

21 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Pretty big difference right out of the gate

 

Not in the long term.  Not in any sustainable, multi-generational way, no.  

on your first point, yes, it is a big difference, which i acknowledged. but when the government is beholden to those with the wealth, i mean, we are talking potatos and patahtos. 

on your second point, i'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say. my point was that communist revolutions were very rapid ways to centralize wealth. i thought i was making a rather negative impression about that, but maybe not. my point ultimately was, communist/socialist revolutions centralize wealth more rapidly than capitalist systems, not more effectively. my overall point, which it seems you might have misunderstood, was that any centralized wealth (in a top 1%-5% class) is a fucking terrible thing for any society.

[Brisketexan 104465]

8 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Sweden moved away from their failed socialist policies in the 70's and 80's and moved from being a has-been state to one of the richest countries on the planet expressly by embracing free-market ideas.  For example, if we did that they did here, it would look a lot like this:

 

1. More free trade

2. A more deregulated product market

3. No Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

4. The abolition of occupational licensing and minimum wage laws

5. The abolition of taxes on property, gifts, and inheritance

6. Even after the recent tax cut, America would still have to slightly reduce its corporate tax

7. America would need to reform Social Security from defined benefits to defined contributions and introduce private accounts

8. The US would also need to adopt a comprehensive school voucher system where private schools get the same per‐pupil funding as public ones.

 

 

Dude...if you're going to crib from the Cato institute, cite it.

And then, if you're going to cite the Sweden model, be honest...add the OTHER things we'd need to do to emulate Sweden.  Like a 62% income tax rate.  And a 25% consumption tax rate.  And single payer health care.  And VERY generous pensions.  Parental leave for over a year.  And we could keep going.  Actually, if we imposed the ENTIRE Sweden package, I'd probably take that trade, any day.  The Cato folks wouldn't.  They'd cherry-pick, ignoring that the things they hate are a big part of what make the things they love actually work.  In reality and practice, managed and fair capitalism, with provision of a healthy baseline of things that actually advance the interests of society as a whole (an educated population is a GOOD thing for business and prosperity, for example, as is a healthy population with access to healthcare), is a strong model to follow.

The problem is, today in the US, even though Sweden would (accurately) say that it is NOT socialist (it was in the past), but is rather a social democracy, a suggestion of "let's adopt the Swedish system" would be greeted with screams of "NOOOO!!!! THAT'S SOCIALISM!"

[wildcat09 29187]

It was really bothering me and I wanted to make sure I wasn't tagging Burnt with someone else's nonsense so I actually went back to TOS and sure enough, it was BurntEyes who started this amazing thread, in which he expressed his opinion that the 14th and 16th amendments to the Constitution were unconstitutional. True galaxy brain stuff.

[Nicole44 22023]

 

24 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

You know I'm anti-union and an isolationist right?

Doesn't matter, I'm clearly stupid, so no I don't know what defund means.

Good news is, nobody is making any judgements about me nor calling me racist.

@Huckleberry would rather launch personal attacks on posters rather than do important things like scratching his watch and winding his butt. 
pretty much every thread since November 2016 (where a lot of people sat on their fucking hands and didn’t vote) goes like this:

 

 

[Huckleberry 32685]

44 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

You know I'm anti-union and an isolationist right?

Doesn't matter, I'm clearly stupid, so no I don't know what defund means.

Good news is, nobody is making any judgements about me nor calling me racist.

What do those two things have to do with whether or not you understand that defunding the police doesn't mean eliminating them?

So if you understand that defund the police doesn't mean eliminating them as you now claim, explain the logic behind this:

5 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Do you actually contend that defunding of police is an actionable realistic goal for any group?

If BLM had ideas that were actually something that could be accomplished, I'd listen.

They don't, so I won't.

Defunding the police has already been accomplished in multiple municipalities. Your post quoted immediately above seems to indicate that you didn't realize that. At first I thought it meant you didn't understand the meaning of the term. If the case is rather that you are not aware of the fact that it's happened in various locations already, then that was my mistake.

15 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

 

@Huckleberry would rather launch personal attacks on posters rather than do important things like scratching his watch and winding his butt. 
pretty much every thread since November 2016 (where a lot of people sat on their fucking hands and didn’t vote) goes like this:

 

 

This also doesn't make sense. The only thing it does is highlight your own hypocrisy.

[gail the snail 31]

Point of order, there isn't a motherfucker on this planet who prefers mangoes to oranges

 

[Dahobbs 17420]

2 hours ago, workswithseed said:

As I see it, if Sweden went from a socialist state to a capitalist dreamscape in 40 years, then why do what Sweden did? I'm gonna take a big guess and say other states will figure this out as well.

 

2 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

Sweden moved away from their failed socialist policies in the 70's and 80's and moved from being a has-been state to one of the richest countries on the planet expressly by embracing free-market ideas.  For example, if we did that they did here, it would look a lot like this:

 

1. More free trade

2. A more deregulated product market

3. No Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

4. The abolition of occupational licensing and minimum wage laws

5. The abolition of taxes on property, gifts, and inheritance

6. Even after the recent tax cut, America would still have to slightly reduce its corporate tax

7. America would need to reform Social Security from defined benefits to defined contributions and introduce private accounts

8. The US would also need to adopt a comprehensive school voucher system where private schools get the same per‐pupil funding as public ones.

 

 

Wow. Y'all know literally nothing about Sweden. See below:

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude...if you're going to crib from the Cato institute, cite it.

And then, if you're going to cite the Sweden model, be honest...add the OTHER things we'd need to do to emulate Sweden.  Like a 62% income tax rate.  And a 25% consumption tax rate.  And single payer health care.  And VERY generous pensions.  Parental leave for over a year.  And we could keep going.  Actually, if we imposed the ENTIRE Sweden package, I'd probably take that trade, any day.  The Cato folks wouldn't.  They'd cherry-pick, ignoring that the things they hate are a big part of what make the things they love actually work.  In reality and practice, managed and fair capitalism, with provision of a healthy baseline of things that actually advance the interests of society as a whole (an educated population is a GOOD thing for business and prosperity, for example, as is a healthy population with access to healthcare), is a strong model to follow.

The problem is, today in the US, even though Sweden would (accurately) say that it is NOT socialist (it was in the past), but is rather a social democracy, a suggestion of "let's adopt the Swedish system" would be greeted with screams of "NOOOO!!!! THAT'S SOCIALISM!"

Yes, let's hold up Sweden as the "capitalist" ideal. That means:

• Total taxes of around 45% of GDP (Link), the US is around 24% of GDP (Link);
• 480 days of paid parental leave (Link)
• Child allowance payments of $120 per month per child. Id.
• Heavily subsidized childcare (Link)
• Universal, government funded healthcare (Link)
• Government focus on environmental sustainability and lowering CO2 emissions (Link), which includes a carbon tax (Link)
• High participation in labor unions, 60+% (Link)
• Minimum 25 paid vacation days in addition 16 public holidays (Link)

I mean, we should definitely do these things. I happen to think they are all good ideas to get a well functioning capitalist market economy (I'm a huge believer in the power of the market). But they aren't what people in the United States would call capitalist or examples of capitalism. Instead, these very things have been called socialist and/or communist.

Edited August 10, 2020 by Dahobbs

[Brisketexan 104465]

1 minute ago, BurntEyes said:

That it continues to be brought up as a black issue and not a US issue allows for non-black, non-progressive, pro-union people who don't know what defund means to simply look at the issue and "not my problem" it away.

Maybe the fact that there are so many of those people, and they have so much sway over our politics, is its own problem?

A response of "who gives a shit, it's just a problem for black people" is a pretty scathing indictment of our country.  Even if it WAS just a problem for black people (and as you point out, it goes well beyond them -- although you and I both know that it is a particularly intense problem for that demographic compared to white folks), then that should fucking matter to us - there are THIRTY SEVEN MILLION black people in the US.  We freak the fuck out when a hurricane hits a city of a few million people....it seems that if we are aware of a problem that negatively impacts 37 million of our countrymen, we oughta give a shit about it.

I mean, we don't, because we're shitty people, but we SHOULD.  So, even if your thesis is correct, the biggest thing it does is reveal yet another gaping wound in our culture.  

[Brisketexan 104465]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

 

Wow. Y'all know literally nothing about Sweden. See below:

Yes, let's hold up Sweden as the "capitalist" ideal. That means:

• Total taxes of around 45% of GDP (Link), the US is around 24% of GDP Link;
• 480 days of paid parental leave (Link(
• Child allowance payments of $120 per month per child. Id.
• Heavily subsidized childcare (Link)
• Universal, government funded healthcare (Link)
• Government focus on environmental sustainability and lowering CO2 emissions (Link), which includes a carbon tax (Link)
• High participation in labor unions, 60+% (Link)
• Minimum 25 paid vacation days in addition 16 public holidays (Link)

Nope, they said it -- Sweden is a capitalist, free-market dream-state.  So, there's my offer.  We adopt the Swedish "capitalist, free-market dream-state" model, 100% -- no modifications, the whole thing, as-is.  

Think any of these guys would take that deal?  Or would we hear "BUT SOCIALISM!  YOU HATE AMERICA AND LOVE GULAGS!"  Yeah.  You know the answer to that.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

19 minutes ago, gail the snail said:

Point of order, there isn't a motherfucker on this planet who prefers mangoes to oranges

 

Oh really ?  gimme a mango anyday

[gail the snail 31]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Oh really ?  gimme a mango anyday

Fuck you then

[gail the snail 31]

I ain't your buddy, pal

[gail the snail 31]

The orange is literally named for the most powerful ruler in history, Orange Julius

Mango's probably named after some bitch

Edited August 11, 2020 by gail the snail
probably nasty too

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, gail the snail said:

The orange is literally named for the most powerful ruler in history, Orange Julius

Mango's probably named after some bitch

Hard to argue with that geometric logic....

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

8 minutes ago, gail the snail said:

Fuck you then

Well....... aaaaaaaallrighty then......  I think we're done here.

[Incredulity 11532]

6 minutes ago, gail the snail said:

I ain't your buddy, pal

I ain’t your pal, friend!

[gail the snail 31]

2 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Orange talk is serious business and ain't going away.

Fuck Orange Commie Cabal.

if it ain't Mandarin you just panderin

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, BurntEyes said:

Don't let those fucking Illuminati wanna be Orange comrades get you down man.

Mango men matter.

(Yeah, I should be negged for that)

What ?  You get some fresh shine today  ??  Not judging of course.

[washparkhorn 9931]

. . . for mangos. 

[washparkhorn 9931]

7 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Don't fade my flex, yo. 

My Mango game is strong.

 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11796]

57 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I'm of the opinion that the message and goals could be modified in a way that would have a much greater chance of getting buy in at a national level.

That buy in could have a direct effect on changing things for the better.

Or the conversation can continue the way it is which, I don't believe will change things.

Find a way that works. 

Get the changes made.

Or keep in the same path which won't and we can let things go further down a dead end path.

Nobody seems to want to deal with the reality of how things can actually be changed.

My voice, a voice for change is dismissed time and again.

At some point, I have to examine if it's still worth using my voice. At some point all champions of a cause can loose faith. 

So do I too fall into "not my problem" and wait for the world to burn?

Because nobody seems to be listening.

 

Wait, you’re saying the victims should be more PC as to not offend the power folks?  Is that what you’re saying?  I hope not.  

[Judge Roybeanbag 11796]

18 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

No, good grief.

Create a message that appeals to multiple segments of the population on a broad spectrum. 

Ya know, Latin, Whites poor and middle class, Asians, Middle Eastern, and many others negatively impacted by shitty laws and bad policy/policing. 

Unite various people on issues that effect almost everyone in various ways.

Get buy in from a larger population.

This concept really isn't that complex.

Change the message to one that works for more people. 

Not one that can potentially create divide through identity politics and Tribalism if perceived as such by those inclined to do so.

Get a majority.. through a collective with a message that appeals to a much larger number of people.

Not to be PC, but to actually, you know, make some fucking changes.

There are people who are negatively impacted by policing policy and laws besides just black people. 

Sigh, am I really explaining this that poorly?

Not necessarily, but George Floyd wasn’t Persian, and Donald Trump isn’t LBJ.  There are going to be some busted eggs until the MINORITY ruling party/class of this country bows and apologizes.  

[wildcat09 29187]

Love to solve racism by pretending it doesn't exist.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

I like both oranges, and mangos..

[Judge Roybeanbag 11796]

P

2 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Well then, I guess I'll enjoy my Mangos while we wait.

I don’t know what’s going on with the papayas!

[leaf 681]

14 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Not necessarily, but George Floyd wasn’t Persian, and Donald Trump isn’t LBJ.  There are going to be some busted eggs until the MINORITY ruling party/class of this country bows and apologizes.  

Of course Trump isn't LBJ.   LBJ was very racist.  

[Judge Roybeanbag 11796]

3 minutes ago, leaf said:

Of course Trump isn't LBJ.   LBJ was very racist.  

He also accomplished something besides grift and shitting his own pants.  Advantage LBJ.

[leaf 681]

1 minute ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

He also accomplished something besides grift and shitting his own pants.  Advantage LBJ.

Of course you would give a racist Democrat a pass.

[leaf 681]

My bad.  Carry on.

[BabaYaga 15202]

13 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Nope, they said it -- Sweden is a capitalist, free-market dream-state.  So, there's my offer.  We adopt the Swedish "capitalist, free-market dream-state" model, 100% -- no modifications, the whole thing, as-is.  

Think any of these guys would take that deal?  Or would we hear "BUT SOCIALISM!  YOU HATE AMERICA AND LOVE GULAGS!"  Yeah.  You know the answer to that.

LOL. you wouldn't make it past the removal of the minimum wage.  But I digress.  You do realize, yet AGAIN, you are missing the goddamn point about about the recent economic changes.  The adoption of aggressive free-market programs that radically altered their economic trajectory and ushered in significant prosperity.  

Sweden's tax rates have always been relatively high (in comparison).  Health care?  It goes back to the 50's.  Child care?  Unions?  LOL.  Yes.  Child care and union participation rates ushered Sweden out of the economic doldrums they were in.  

They cut their debt to GDP from >100% down to the mid 30's by cutting government spending YOY for a decade and simplified the tax code.  The primary target of those cuts were healthcare.  Fiscal austerity, not welfare spending moved the needle.  They cut taxes across the board (income, property, and corporate) and made radical free market changes.  They completely abolished wealth and inheritance taxes.  Saab went BK in 2011.  Did they bail them out?  Thousands of workers?  Too big to fail.  Fuck Saab.  They let the natural cycles of growth and destruction play out.  

Sweden's economy stagnated specifically between 1970 and 1995.  Coinciding with the embrace of some of their most extensive welfare state policies.  In recent years the Swedish economy has grown strongly again, following a return to freer markets. Sweden has conducted market-friendly reforms in many areas - as stated:  such as openness to trade, personal retirement accounts and private production of welfare services and dramatically reduced taxes.  

 

 

 

 

[Brisketexan 104465]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

LOL. you wouldn't make it past the removal of the minimum wage.  But I digress.  You do realize, yet AGAIN, you are missing the goddamn point about about the recent economic changes.  The adoption of aggressive free-market programs that radically altered their economic trajectory and ushered in significant prosperity.  

Sweden's tax rates have always been relatively high (in comparison).  Health care?  It goes back to the 50's.  Child care?  Unions?  LOL.  Yes.  Child care and union participation rates ushered Sweden out of the economic doldrums they were in.  

They cut their debt to GDP from >100% down to the mid 30's by cutting government spending YOY for a decade and simplified the tax code.  The primary target of those cuts were healthcare.  Fiscal austerity, not welfare spending moved the needle.  They cut taxes across the board (income, property, and corporate) and made radical free market changes.  They completely abolished wealth and inheritance taxes.  Saab went BK in 2011.  Did they bail them out?  Thousands of workers?  Too big to fail.  Fuck Saab.  They let the natural cycles of growth and destruction play out.  

Sweden's economy stagnated specifically between 1970 and 1995.  Coinciding with the embrace of some of their most extensive welfare state policies.  In recent years the Swedish economy has grown strongly again, following a return to freer markets. Sweden has conducted market-friendly reforms in many areas - as stated:  such as openness to trade, personal retirement accounts and private production of welfare services and dramatically reduced taxes.  

 

 

 

 

Cool.  And today's Sweden is successful and stable, and is able to feed those capitalist systems, with what remains a strong government support network of healthcare, education, leave, etc., as noted above.  A balanced system that is not a "growthist" "fuck everyone not in the 1%" system, but also isn't a fully socialist system, is actually a proven winner here.

Are you willing to take on the total Sweden package, or not? 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

It comes down to how society chooses to organize itself.  Regardless of systems or philosophies, when power gets concentrated among fewer and fewer people, shit inevitably goes bad.  It’s one of the time tested lessons humans have yet to figure out because we keep making the same mistakes.  It seems to be a flaw in the human condition. 

[BabaYaga 15202]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool.  And today's Sweden is successful and stable, and is able to feed those capitalist systems, with what remains a strong government support network of healthcare, education, leave, etc., as noted above.  A balanced system that is not a "growthist" "fuck everyone not in the 1%" system, but also isn't a fully socialist system, is actually a proven winner here.

Are you willing to take on the total Sweden package, or not? 

Cute how your over generalizations and hyperbole stain almost every one of your posts.  The total Sweden package?  Here?  Sure.  Let's start with the foundation.  For starters, lets take a land mass the size of a few large states, sitting atop a ridiculous amount of natural resources with a population of only a few million, is ethnically and religiously homogeneous with a strong Lutheran work ethic combined with a powerful sense of probity and experiences almost no mass immigration of any kind.  But yeah.  Unions and child care.  

 

[Brisketexan 104465]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Cute how your over generalizations and hyperbole stain almost every one of your posts.  The total Sweden package?  Here?  Sure.  Let's start with the foundation.  For starters, lets take a land mass the size of a few large states, sitting atop a ridiculous amount of natural resources with a population of only a few million, is ethnically and religiously homogeneous with a strong Lutheran work ethic combined with a powerful sense of probity and experiences almost no mass immigration of any kind.  But yeah.  Unions and child care.  

 

Cool.  So, I'll mark you down as a "no," in spite of the fact that you want to point to Sweden, repeatedly, as an example.  We can't emulate that because we are not [confirms exact quote] "ethnically and religiously homogenous."  It would have been more honest if you'd said "because the lazy blacks and beaners keep us down," but you do you.

Oh, and Sweden doesn't experience mass immigration?  Interesting.  Being that in the past decade, Sweden annually takes in anywhere from 1% to 1.5% of its population in immigrants.  We, on the other hand, take in around .5% of our population as immigrants annually.

Keep going.  This is fascinating.

[bad_teammate 13125]

"strong Lutheran work ethic" here we go, let's get to the good stuff

[bad_teammate 13125]

- Land mass doesn't really matter
- Black people are not lazy, stupid, and useless moral degenerates
- Christianity did not introduce the world to physical exertion and cooperative effort
- America is bursting with natural resources

Love it when they tell on themselves. So good.

[Brisketexan 104465]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

- Land mass doesn't really matter
- Black people are not lazy, stupid, and useless moral degenerates
- Christianity did not introduce the world to physical exertion and cooperative effort
- America is bursting with natural resources

Love it when they tell on themselves. So good.

Yeah, the "ridiculous amount of natural resources" thing is puzzling -- Sweden ain't Norway.  They don't have Statoil (which, by the way, is STATE-OWNED, and has fed a massive sovereign wealth fund to benefit ALL of the citizens of Norway).  They pretty much don't have ANY oil.  Sure, they have some resources - mining, timber, etc.  But they aren't a huge resource economy.  So, that's another miss.

[bad_teammate 13125]

The reason we can't do what Sweden does is because those with power and money here hate those without power and money. It's basically that simple.

[The University 851]

if you aren't already familiar with the navajo code talkers during ww2, check into it. this upcoming friday (8/14) is also set aside to honor their service.

[Brisketexan 104465]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The reason we can't do what Sweden does is because those with power and money here hate those without power and money. It's basically that simple.

A simpler way to discuss the dividing line is "countries that have a general ethic that believes in the common good, and that influences its policies, the actions of its citizens in society, and the marketplace" and "countries that don't."

[wildcat09 29187]

36 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"strong Lutheran work ethic" here we go, let's get to the good stuff

We really should have been betting on this yesterday. You knew it was coming.

[Dahobbs 17420]

48 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Cute how your over generalizations and hyperbole stain almost every one of your posts.  The total Sweden package?  Here?  Sure.  Let's start with the foundation.  For starters, lets take a land mass the size of a few large states, sitting atop a ridiculous amount of natural resources with a population of only a few million, is ethnically and religiously homogeneous with a strong Lutheran work ethic combined with a powerful sense of probity and experiences almost no mass immigration of any kind.  But yeah.  Unions and child care.  

 

Why is it that you feel it impossible to incorporate Sweden's laws on things like healthcare, unions, childcare, taxes, and employment due to to its geographic and demographic differences from the United States, but you feel perfectly fine incorporating other elements of Sweden's system  that you say supports capitalism? Why aren't those latter elements also impossible to incorporate?

I find it funny that people want take a part a system, with no understanding of how it all works together, and just leave pieces of it. You'd really hate your mechanic to view your car this way. The components are designed to work together. You can't just remove something like an alternator and have everything be hunky dory. 

[BabaYaga 15202]

48 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool.  So, I'll mark you down as a "no," in spite of the fact that you want to point to Sweden, repeatedly, as an example.  We can't emulate that because we are not [confirms exact quote] "ethnically and religiously homogenous."  It would have been more honest if you'd said "because the lazy blacks and beaners keep us down," but you do you.

Oh, and Sweden doesn't experience mass immigration?  Interesting.  Being that in the past decade, Sweden annually takes in anywhere from 1% to 1.5% of its population in immigrants.  We, on the other hand, take in around .5% of our population as immigrants annually.

Keep going.  This is fascinating.

Cute.  Let's completely gloss over your bullshit about unions, health care, and vacation hours as "part" of the package and try to tie those into the discernible austerity measures and fiscal changes they made that brought them back from the brink.  Yeah.  Fuck all that.  

The homogeneity of these countries has long been cited as a contributor to their collective decision making.  Scandinavians have long been described as having an extremely high levels of social trust and cohesion, facilitating a massive welfare state.  Shit won't work here.  But yeah.  Again.  Fuck you, race bating twat.  Countries have culture.  Germans and the French are different.  So are the Italians and Dutch.  

[BabaYaga 15202]

12 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Why is it that you feel it impossible to incorporate Sweden's laws on things like healthcare, unions, childcare, taxes, and employment due to to its geographic and demographic differences from the United States, but you feel perfectly fine incorporating other elements of Sweden's system  that you say supports capitalism? Why aren't those latter elements also impossible to incorporate?

I find it funny that people want take a part a system, with no understanding of how it all works together, and just leave pieces of it. You'd really hate your mechanic to view your car this way. The components are designed to work together. You can't just remove something like an alternator and have everything be hunky dory. 

Because you can cite and directly attribute proven free market ideas that were used, and have been used by other nations and states as examples.  This isn't hard.  The other "parts" predate these changes.  Sweden succeeded in spite of these, not because of them.  They didn't cut their debt to GDP because of child care.  They cut it through austerity measures, embracing free-market ideas, reduced taxes, and reduced spending.  The rise in revenue allowed these ancillary welfare measure to be maintained. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

On 8/11/2020 at 12:18 PM, BabaYaga said:

Cute.  Let's completely gloss over your bullshit about unions, health care, and vacation hours as "part" of the package and try to tie those into the discernible austerity measures and fiscal changes they made that brought them back from the brink.  Yeah.  Fuck all that.  

The homogeneity of these countries has long been cited as a contributor to their collective decision making.  Scandinavians have long been described as having an extremely high levels of social trust and cohesion, facilitating a massive welfare state.  Shit won't work here.  But yeah.  Again.  Fuck you, race bating twat.  Countries have culture.  Germans and the French are different.  So are the Italians and Dutch.  

You cannot use the term homogeneity anymore. Did you not get the mee-mo ?

 

EDIT:  Fuck you too Huckledick. what a passive aggressive pussy you are, constantly.

Edited August 14, 2020 by Onboard 2.0

[Brisketexan 104465]

3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Let's completely gloss over your bullshit about unions, health care, and vacation hours as "part" of the package and try to tie those into the discernible austerity measures and fiscal changes they made that brought them back from the brink.

Yet those things REMAIN a huge part of the overall package.  And you want to discount them completely.  I truly find that a fascinating take.  "If you completely discount all of the measures that Sweden has in place to foster the interest of all the people, funded by a 60%+ tax rate and a 25% consumption tax, it's PURE ANARCHO CAPITALISM, BABY!"  And if you discount the law of gravity, we would all float into space.  Pretty big "if" there.

3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

The homogeneity of these countries has long been cited as a contributor to their collective decision making. 

The collective ethos is definitely a real thing.  We don't have it.  Do you think that's because we have black people and Catholics, or because our culture has been utterly manipulated by the people in power to pit us against each other, and consistently degrade any notion of the common good?  

Germans and French are different, as are the Italians and the Dutch.....yet every one of those societies has a greater ethos in favor of the common good than we have.  And it shows.