McCain: Obama Policies Socialist

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
106
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
you do realize you're quoting definitions from 19th century economics and ideologues stuck in the 19th century

economics, economic structures, and political structures have changed a bit since then




Nothing nothing in the above meets the definition......

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

The socialist party's website lists it all here Socialist Party USA.

Oh sure the author says socialism but nothing he has written conforms to the definition. More than anything he basically wants to end to government regulation and more personal choice. Regulation is not socialism.

It's a ephitat being thrown at Obama like Goldwater threw at Johnson and has no proof behind it. If any proof exists it's George Bush's nationalizing banks. Now THAT is a step towards socialism.

"Obama is about as far from being a socialist as Joe The Plumber is from being a rocket scientist," said Darrell West, director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "I think it's hard for McCain to call Obama a socialist when George Bush is nationalizing banks."

And this from Bruce Carruthers, a sociology professor at
Northwestern University: "Obama is like a center-liberal Democrat, and he is certainly not looking to overthrow capitalism. My goodness, he wouldn't have the support of someone like The Wizard of Omaha, Warren Buffet, if he truly was going to overthrow capitalism."

Socialists say Barack Obama is not -- chicagotribune.com
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
you do realize you're quoting definitions from 19th century economics and ideologues stuck in the 19th century

economics, economic structures, and political structures have changed a bit since then

No I didn't realize that. Please enlighten me.

Where is the government control of industry, the means and the production? The question is pretty simple.
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
106
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
well, for starters, a good summary can be found at The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Jan, 2002, "New Political Economics" Then and Now: Economic Theory and the Mutation of Political Doctrine -- Historical Perspectives, esp. III, "The Economics of Control" ...
WHAT HAPPENED NEXT was the belated assimilation of some insights of Condillac, Thunen, Cournot, Dupuit and Gossen during the so-called "marginal revolution"; the application of marginal concepts to welfare theory; a deployment of neo-classical production and welfare concepts in the theory of "market socialism"; a revival of macroeconomics resulting from the so-called Keynesian revolution; and a grand combination of all these in what Samuelson described as "the neo-classical synthesis." The neo-classical synthesis provided a conceptual framework for yet another "new political economy," which gradually came to replace the presupposition of laissez-faire among the educated classes of Britain and America by the middle of the twentieth century. For by 1950 it was taken for granted by all--save a tiny minority of ignored and/or derided dissidents--that modern, technical economic theory had supplied the tools for implementing democratic socialism without the need of revolution. The mood of the time is perfectly capt ured by Abba Lerner's The Economics of Control:
The fundamental aim of socialism is not the abolition of private property but the extension of democracy. This is obscured by dogmas of the right and of the left. The benefits of both the capitalist economy and the collectivist economy can he reaped in the controlled economy. The three principal problems to he faced in a controlled economy are employment, monopoly, and the distribution of income. Control must be distinguished from regulation. Liberalism and socialism can be reconciled in welfare economics (Lerner 1944, p. xi).
Even those such as Joseph Schumpeter, who disliked the prospect of socialism, feared it was probably inevitable. "Marx's vision was right," for 'the capitalist process not only destroys its own institutional framework but it also creates the conditions for another"; "The March into Socialism" has already begun; "Can socialism work? Of course it can" (Schumpeter [1943] 1987, pp. 162, 421-431, 167).

there are other works, but this should get you started in the right direction


 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
106
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
And last time I checked any politician that ATTEMPTS to cut ANY of those programs it's political DEATH. It's called The Third Rail. Touch it and you die.

which returns us to the issues of economic, political, and social CONTROL (see the various articles cited)

once control (i.e., POWER) is attained, it is not easily surrendered or dislodged
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
The lack of a clear ideological affiliation makes today's paternalism-parentalism increasingly resemble the early 20th century's progressive movement. .....yada yada yada


Where oh where in all that is........

1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

The fundamental component OWNERSHIP is not there. Now what Bush did last couple months with government ownership of financial institutions, yep shades of socialism. But where is the ownership and planning component in any of Obama's policies?
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
106
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
again, you're attempting to put a 19th century gloss

if Marx were to return today, and look at around at the American economy, he would assume his revolution had taken place

he would be looking at employee stock ownership, the Federal Reserve, pension plans, Social Security

the control would be the massive federal legislative and regulatory structure exemplified by the New Deal, and the massive social programs under Johnson, and ... extended by a new forthcoming super-liberal majority?


Where oh where in all that is........

1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

The fundamental component OWNERSHIP is not there. Now what Bush did last couple months with government ownership of financial institutions, yep shades of socialism. But where is the ownership and planning component in any of Obama's policies?
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
again, you're attempting to put a 19th century gloss
if Marx were to return today, and look at around at the American economy, he would assume his revolution had taken place

he would be looking at employee stock ownership, the Federal Reserve, pension plans, Social Security

the control would be the massive federal legislative and regulatory structure exemplified by the New Deal, and the massive social programs under Johnson, and ... extended by a new forthcoming super-liberal majority?

Ohhh my Gawd....whatever. This is the same 'link' as Saddam and al Qaeda.

If all you mention has now gone beyond mere socialism but straight to communism then NO political party can help you. What you really want is no government at all. And that is an unelectable platform.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
And of course they are …

McCain suggests Obama tax policies are socialist - Yahoo! News

CONCORD, N.C. – Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Saturday accused Democratic rival Barack Obama of favoring a socialistic economic approach by supporting tax cuts and tax credits McCain says would merely shuffle wealth rather than creating it.

"At least in Europe, the Socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are upfront about their objectives," McCain said in a radio address. "They use real numbers and honest language. And we should demand equal candor from Sen. Obama. Raising taxes on some in order to give checks to others is not a tax cut; it's just another government giveaway."


Get ready to meet your new socialist President then.... What does it say about McCain if he can't beat a "Marxist socialist"? please... gimme a break. How WEAK do you have to be? I mean, really? No one believes this but you bro.
 

ripsrips

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Posts
1,315
Media
10
Likes
2,468
Points
443
Location
California (United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
....or Joe the Plumber actually being a certified plumber.

You just don't get it...It doesn't matter if it's Joe the plumber, Martha the muffin maker, Frank the firefighter...
Joe asked a legitimate question and your candidate Berry showed his true colors and got exposed and that drives you Liberalist crazy…It doesn’t matter if he’s a plumber, owes taxes or belongs to a union or is unemployed. What do you Liberalist do…you belittle him, you look into his past, you question his motives, you do everything to tear him down…when all he did was ask a question that we wanted the media to ask but were in his corner and of course you would never ask that of the Messiah.

Farrakhan on Obama: 'The Messiah is absolutely speaking'
 

tripod

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Posts
6,686
Media
14
Likes
1,893
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
You just don't get it...It doesn't matter if it's Joe the plumber, Martha the muffin maker, Frank the firefighter...
Joe asked a legitimate question and your candidate Berry showed his true colors and got exposed and that drives you Liberalist crazy…It doesn’t matter if he’s a plumber, owes taxes or belongs to a union or is unemployed. What do you Liberalist do…you belittle him, you look into his past, you question his motives, you do everything to tear him down…when all he did was ask a question that we wanted the media to ask but were in his corner and of course you would never ask that of the Messiah.

Farrakhan on Obama: 'The Messiah is absolutely speaking'

Joe the plumber is too stupid to even talk about economics.

He was talking about his company grossing $250,000, not netting $250,000.

There is no fucking way that his company makes a profit of $250,000 a year... there aren't many plumbers in the world who make that kind of profit.

So, he was confused about what the word profit means... that doesn't surprise me though.

Joe the plumber actually only made 40,000 dollars last year and would hardly have the capital available to buy the company anyway (considering he is fast about to get a lien put against his property or possessions by the IRS) ... he doesn't even have a license to be a plumber... and the other guy(current owner) doesn't have one either... they didn't even know that you needed one! lol!!!!

Joe the plumber is a republican plant and a verified dipshit.

I am not belittling him... he already did that to himself by opening his mouth and asking an assinine question.
 

ripsrips

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Posts
1,315
Media
10
Likes
2,468
Points
443
Location
California (United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Joe the plumber is too stupid to even talk about economics.

He was talking about his company grossing $250,000, not netting $250,000.

There is no fucking way that his company makes a profit of $250,000 a year... there aren't many plumbers in the world who make that kind of profit.

So, he was confused about what the word profit means... that doesn't surprise me though.

Joe the plumber actually only made 40,000 dollars last year and would hardly have the capital available to buy the company anyway (considering he is fast about to get a lien put against his property or possessions by the IRS) ... he doesn't even have a license to be a plumber... and the other guy(current owner) doesn't have one either... they didn't even know that you needed one! lol!!!!

Joe the plumber is a republican plant and a verified dipshit.

I am not belittling him... he already did that to himself by opening his mouth and asking an assinine question.

Thank you for making my point!
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Wait... didn't Republicans already try to turn a fellow Democrat's words against them with Hillary? Now they're doing it with Joe Biden? Seriously... it didn't work the last time. Why does anyone think it's going to work now?

If Biden really meant what he said during the Primary regarding Obama, then he wouldn't be on the VP ticket now. Why align yourself with someone whose doomed to fail just to be elected into office?

It makes absolutely no sense, people. None whatsoever.