# What happened to manners in our society ?



## BallinBruha (Dec 11, 2020)

“I’ll have a....”
“Give me a...”
“I’ll take a ...”

I am noticing as I’m out doing deliveries how often people don’t use basic manners when ordering. Anyone else notice this ?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

If you said "gimmee" to my parents, it was an automatic "no". You had to say "please". If you did not say "thank you" when you received it, you had to return it. I decided to get smart and say "Please gimmee" or "Gimmee please". I received it, but with the caution not to push it.


----------



## Mad_Jack_Flint (Nov 19, 2020)

Manners is like old TV shows and they are from the past and only the older generation remembers how it was!


----------



## kdyrpr (Apr 23, 2016)

A direct result of people with their head buried in their phones. You can still get it from the older generations. We were raised by humans.


----------



## Kilroy4303 (Jul 31, 2020)

We have gone from a society of earning our keep and making our way through life
to one of entitlement. 

I was raised a certain way, Yes Sir, no Sir, thank you, please. . . and pardon me. .or excuse me. . .
and I would never. . .ever think about talking back to my parents or being rude. Blunt does not mean rude. . or speaking ones mind is not rude. . .it can be done in a polite / professional manner. 

It is a sad state of affairs to see how people act now a days.


----------



## bone-aching-work (Jul 12, 2020)

"why x when we had less of x in the past?"
Many questions have the same answer.










Everyone wants to stay on "the good side" of town but won't admit to themselves *or allow others to state* what makes it the good side.


----------



## BallinBruha (Dec 11, 2020)

Personally, I think it has to do with technologies influence. 

I used to be a teacher. That’s what all my schooling/ certification is. Specially special education. 

I left the profession because our kids/ parents/ educational system is focused so heavily on technology that we are forgetting to teach our kids how to interact with each other. 

We are becoming increasing addicted to our devices and distancing ourselves from our fellow man. I’m fortunate that I like other posters here was able to get social skills and learn manners before everything started going to hell. 

Unfortunately I don’t see any of this improving as time goes on.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

I think it has more to do with the break up of the two parent family.

Kids practically raise themselves today.

My kids school also had an enormous positive influence on their growth and behavior.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Mad_Jack_Flint said:


> Manners is like old TV shows and they are from the past and only the older generation remembers how it was!


That generation raised this generation, so really, it's the fault of the Baby Boomers who spend so much time complaining about it. For not raising their children correctly.


----------



## W00dbutcher (Jan 14, 2019)

The internet has ate away at the fabric of society. No accountability. Anybody can say whatever the hell they want and not have any kind of blowback other than words or maybe... you mad bro?

Whatever happened to getting punched in your nose when you disrespect somebody? Oh that's right the damn snowflakes can hide who they are now!


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> That generation raised this generation, so really, it's the fault of the Baby Boomers who spend so much time complaining about it. For not raising their children correctly.


Generalization, much?

This baby boomer, along with his awesome boomer wife, raised two respectful, mannered, financially successful boys who, while not likely, could body slam, knife or shoot anyone who threatened the family.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

W00dbutcher said:


> The internet has ate away at the fabric of society. No accountability. Anybody can say whatever the hell they want and not have any kind of blowback other than words or maybe... you mad bro?
> 
> Whatever happened to getting punched in your nose when you disrespect somebody? Oh that's right the damn snowflakes can hide who they are now!


What he said.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

bone-aching-work said:


> "why x when we had less of x in the past?"
> Many questions have the same answer.
> 
> View attachment 601445
> ...


Do you realize that all human species originated in East Africa?

Like it or not, we are all blood brothers due to a great, great grandma from long, long ago.


----------



## W00dbutcher (Jan 14, 2019)

Judge and Jury said:


> Do you realize that all human species originated in East Africa?
> 
> Like it or not, we are all blood brothers due to a great, great grandma from long, long ago.


Grams was a ho...... 
Gramps was a Dogg..... 

Uncle Tommy was...... Well a farmer


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

W00dbutcher said:


> Grams was a ho......
> Gramps was a Dogg.....
> 
> Uncle Tommy was...... Well a farmer


Grandpa told me it runs in the family.

Took a couple of decades before I relealized he was specifically referring to me.

And it wasn't about my height.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Judge and Jury said:


> Generalization, much?
> 
> This baby boomer, along with his awesome boomer wife, raised two respectful, mannered, financially successful boys who, while not likely, could body slam, knife or shoot anyone who threatened the family.


It’s a statistical average, not meant to apply to any one individual. I just find the irony of the Boomers complaining about Millennials when they raised them!


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

bone-aching-work said:


> "why x when we had less of x in the past?"
> Many questions have the same answer.
> 
> View attachment 601445
> ...


Really .Do you really want to go there ? 

There is a reason why minorities used to be poor and uneducated . Fortunately that is starting to change . Do you want to know why we feel we losing manners? 
Because presently we have record number of uneducated ignorant racist white population that use to be educated middle class.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> It’s a statistical average, not meant to apply to any one individual. I just find the irony of the Boomers complaining about Millennials when they raised them!


So, a generalization.

Based on what statistical study?

Based on internet forums?

Baby boomers were part of the weed and hallucinogenic generation. We shook the foundations.

Be free, don't let The Man dictate.

Allow your children to find their own path, with a little guidance.

Seems the country has not disintegrated, though we were on the edge recently.

Peace.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

UberPotomac said:


> Really .Do you really want to go there ?
> 
> There is a reason why minorities used to be poor and uneducated . Fortunately that is starting to change . Do you want to know why we feel we losing manners?
> Because presently we have record number of uneducated ignorant racist white population that use to be educated middle class.


Seems because of family genetics, he has lost his ascendancy in society.

Stupid and slow.

So he blames minorities.

An old story.


----------



## Guido-TheKillerPimp (Jan 4, 2021)

Kilroy4303 said:


> making our way through life
> to one of entitlement.


So you know @SHalester personally?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Guido-TheKillerPimp said:


> So you know @SHalester personally?


poor puppy, were the words there too big for you? hahahahahaha

Isn't it nap time for you, puppy?


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

What is the meaning of the word "please"? It has no meaning. How is it more respectful to use the word "please" than to not use the word "please?" It seems like an arbitrary cultural learning that somehow making this noise in the middle of a request makes it more polite.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)




----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Trafficat said:


> What is the meaning of the word "please"? It has no meaning. How is it more respectful to use the word "please" than to not use the word "please?" It seems like an arbitrary cultural learning that somehow making this noise in the middle of a request makes it more polite.


"Please" generally means to feel happy or satisfied.

When you ask someone to "please" do something, you are asking them to feel happy or satisfied to complete your request.

"Thank you" is another benign expression.

In many Spanish speaking countries, "de nada", translated as "no problem", is the answer to please pick up your third cousin from the airport at two am.

It's all about functioning in a society of more than 150 people.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

You're gonna do this, and you're gonna like it, too!


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Trafficat said:


> You're gonna do this, and you're gonna like it, too!


Please.

And thank you.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Trafficat said:


> You're gonna do this, and you're gonna like it, too!


So, you are acquainted with my wife?


----------



## BallinBruha (Dec 11, 2020)

Trafficat said:


> What is the meaning of the word "please"? It has no meaning. How is it more respectful to use the word "please" than to not use the word "please?" It seems like an arbitrary cultural learning that somehow making this noise in the middle of a request makes it more polite.


?? Are you serious ? Trolling ? 

You don’t know what please means ?


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> That generation raised this generation, so really, it's the fault of the Baby Boomers who spend so much time complaining about it. For not raising their children correctly.


Not too good and math are we ? Baby Boomers were born from 1946 to 1964 which means they were having children in the 70's and 80's . Those children were called Gen X and it is they who are the parents of millennials . Since you're obviously not too good at math , you probably now buy into the math is racist narrative .


----------



## BestInDaWest (Apr 8, 2021)

with every passing day I am evermore grateful for my now deceased parents. their legacy lives on in my daily life. Thanks mom and dad


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

UberPotomac said:


> There is a reason why minorities used to be poor and uneducated . Fortunately that is starting to change .


Are you saying minorities are no longer poor ?


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

bone-aching-work said:


> "why x when we had less of x in the past?"
> Many questions have the same answer.
> 
> View attachment 601445
> ...


The loss of manner and gentility is most prominent in mixed areas and Caucasian areas. America is the failure, not any one race.


----------



## Juggalo9er (Dec 7, 2017)

BallinBruha said:


> “I’ll have a....”
> “Give me a...”
> “I’ll take a ...”
> 
> I am noticing as I’m out doing deliveries how often people don’t use basic manners when ordering. Anyone else notice this ?


Chivalry is not dead


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

Just noticed this afternoon at Chinese buffet, told my waitress thank you when she picked up my empty soda cup and thank you when she returned it full. Hot as hell so I was thirsty AF. 5 refills! Thought, boy I’ve been saying thank you a lot...


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Amos69 said:


> The loss of manner and gentility is most prominent in mixed areas and Caucasian areas. America is the failure, not any one race.


The post you responded to was written by a fool.

However, how do you justify the claims in your post?

Please provide specifics.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

radikia said:


> Are you saying minorities are no longer poor ?


Nope.

He is saying The American Dream is being realized by minorities that were kept under the thumb of The Man for a long time.

My people had to migrate to the Ohio Valley way back when due to discrimination.

Discrimination is a plague on American society.

Do you discriminate?


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

radikia said:


> Are you saying minorities are no longer poor ?


I am saying everyday more people are adapting and finding ways to succeed. Change is slow but things they see unthinkable now some made them possible.









Almost half of Fortune 500 companies were founded by American immigrants or their children


Economists disagree about a lot of things, but two areas—the importance of entrepreneurship to economic growth and job creation, and the outsized role that immigrants play in founding American comp…




www.google.com


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

Judge and Jury said:


> The post you responded to was written by a fool.
> 
> However, how do you justify the claims in your post?
> 
> Please provide specifics.


Sure, I have a few minutes.

I travel the world fairly extensively. (I climb mountains). I have occasion to spend much time immersed with indigenous communities of many ethnicities. I have found that the more humble and grounded a community is, the least amount of technology and outside influence to be " more" , the more civil and genteel they are.

It doesn't matter Their genetics,, the common denominator for rude and impolite behaviors always seems to come from outside influences. Unfortunately Caucasians are generally "The Borg" trying to overwrite and assimilate or destroy any other culture.

As a species we are warlike and driven to conquer and assimilate or destroy, our history tells us this. In the absence of strife or need to conquer, it seems that Caucasians still need to try to dominate all.

While on the surface, technology might seem responsible for the loss of gentility, that is just the current tool. The crucible if you will. Those places and manufactures where we lose our civility in the modern world is where white tries to overwrite non white cultures.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

BallinBruha said:


> ?? Are you serious ? Trolling ?
> 
> You don’t know what please means ?


Don't be rude. You were supposed to say, "Oh please! You can't be serious!"

It is a noise without meaning. At least "thank you" is an expression of gratitude. What is "please"? An expression of begging? I use "please" to beg with, because it is true that people perceive it polite (or perhaps pitiful). But adding "please" to sentence is not meaningful and many times is irritating, especially as most people use it sarcastically or during the making of an impolite demand, where there is no meaning behind it at all. Extra syllables to soften the blow of a demand at best, and at worst it is deliberately used to ridicule. If the demand is reasonable, does please make it better? If it is unreasonable, does it make the demand more persuasive?

"May I use the restroom" sounds plenty polite and "May I use the restroom please" sounds polite too. Not noticeably so. "Please let me use the restroom" sounds like a demand and is less polite than both.

"Get out of my way" sounds impolite and "Please get out of my way" doesn't really sound any better.

For the most part, the politeness of a request depends more on the phrasing around the world "please" than the word please itself. I would say 3 times out of 4 please makes the phrase less polite, and the other 1 time out of 4 it makes it a smidgen more polite. But I generally avoid the word please because I think it is usually used to be rude rather than polite and it is easy to accidentally be rude using the word please. Perhaps the best use of the word "please" is it gives you a syllable with which to add polite tones to if you are so inclined. The same sentence can be rude or polite depending on how it is said more than the specific words.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

radikia said:


> Not too good and math are we ? Baby Boomers were born from 1946 to 1964 which means they were having children in the 70's and 80's . Those children were called Gen X and it is they who are the parents of millennials . Since you're obviously not too good at math , you probably now buy into the math is racist narrative .


You are funny, I'm comfortably with my math skills, I have a degree in Chemistry.
But back to demographics: Millennials were born from 1980 to 2000, so I doubt a 1972 Gen-X'r was giving birth at 8-15 years old.
A Boomer born in 1960 however, would be giving birth to Millennials.
I'm not going to address whatever accusations you just baldface threw at me regarding racism. Not worthy of further comment.
Keep wearing your ignorance like a badge. It helps the rest of us identify you.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

The word "Please" is a non-sequitur of the most heinous sort


----------



## bone-aching-work (Jul 12, 2020)

Amos69 said:


> Racist Bïþçĥ.
> 
> 
> The loss of manner and gentility is most prominent in mixed areas and Caucasian areas. America is the failure, not any one race.


Yikes, you're an angry person, and wrong. Cool it with the anti-white remarks...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1406951070207782915


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

bone-aching-work said:


> Yikes, you're an angry person, and wrong. Cool it with the anti-white remarks...
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1406951070207782915


I'm not angry. You wouldn't like me when I am angry.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Amos69 said:


> Sure, I have a few minutes.
> 
> I travel the world fairly extensively. (I climb mountains). I have occasion to spend much time immersed with indigenous communities of many ethnicities. I have found that the more humble and grounded a community is, the least amount of technology and outside influence to be " more" , the more civil and genteel they are.
> 
> ...


Great post.

Thanks.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

Don't mix up causation and correlation. There are correlations between being a minority and being a criminal, and minority rich neighborhoods being high crime. But people are fundamentally people. Being white doesn't make you polite or impolite, and being mixed race does not make a part of town bad. When it comes to bad parts of town, it is generally the reverse that is true. Minorities do not make bad parts of town bad. They live in bad parts of town because they are bad, and they cannot afford to live in better parts. In the bad parts of town there are bad people of all races. The white meth heads there are not better, and they are there for the same reason as the minorities. They have no money.

The decline of America is correlated with racial diversity, but again, the racial diversity is not causing the decline in America but rather the reverse is true. American decline is causing racial diversity. The American schools cannot produce educated individuals because the schools are terrible, so we bring people over on visas for high paying jobs that require skills that are not taught here. Similarly, white parents are not having enough children to satisfy labor demands, so USA imports low-skilled laborers from non-white regions. They are racially diverse because they are not from here and we need them here because domestically there is a shortage of both smart people who actually know how to get things done and workers who can put in good hours doing unskilled labor... and then we have a lot of people here who are basically useless but get lots of kush jobs because they have the right connections (a.k.a. "institutional racism" since these people tend to be white, even though a white unconnected person is probably just as likely to be excluded from these jobs, if not more so thanks to affirmative action). 

The real cause of decline in America is the slow adoption of socialism. This is caused by the terrible education system in America, mainly lead by hypocritical white liberals who hate white people but won't step down from their posts as academic professionals, (isn't it strange how it is always some white university president preaching about the evils of whites and institutional racism at the highest levels of management when he could set the example and step down to let a minority take over?), as well as through the importation of people who are educated in socialism. It's not their race, but just a product of their education. But it wouldn't be any better if they were white people imported from Western Europe where socialism is also taught. The immigrants just happen to be socialist and also minorities, because socialists from Europe have no real cause to move to USA whereas socialists from Mexico are likely to find a better life here.

Ironically, in places where extreme socialism is actually practiced, the people are often less enthusiastic for socialism because they already experienced it and knew it was bad. That's why immigrants from Ukraine, Cuba and Vietnam tend not to vote for socialism. They know it is a lie because they have seen it first hand.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

W00dbutcher said:


> Grams was a ho......
> Gramps was a Dogg.....
> 
> Uncle Tommy was...... Well a farmer


and Jerimiah was a bullfrog ... 

you know ...


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> and Jerimiah was a bullfrog ...
> 
> you know ...


And I helped him drink his wine.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> And I helped him drink his wine.


** nodding **
He always had some mighty fine wine.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> ** nodding **
> He always had some mighty fine wine.


Three Dog Night.
Very underrated band.


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> All I know is that Canadian's
> 
> You are funny, I'm comfortably with my math skills, I have a degree in Chemistry.
> But back to demographics: Millennials were born from 1980 to 2000, so I doubt a 1972 Gen-X'r was giving birth at 8-15 years old.
> ...


You shouldn't be . Are you comfortably with your grammar skills ? Having your own meth lab doesn't mean you have a degree in Chemistry . Apparently you were doing more than simply mixing chemicals or maybe you just didn't wear a mask while doing it . Even the oldest baby boomers born in 1946 would only have started having children around 1970 and their children would be having children starting in 1990 . I don't consider a 41 year old to be a millennial and neither does anyone else , millennials are only now entering their 30's . As far as identification is concerned , snowflakes are much easier to spot , especially during the summer months and because they are so easily triggered .


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Judge and Jury said:


> Do you discriminate?


Only based on character or lack thereof .........


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

radikia said:


> Only based on character or lack thereof .........


Ok.

Great attitude.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> Three Dog Night.
> Very underrated band.


I lost my virginity in the back of a '55 Chevy two-door with Three Dog Night serenading us on my brand new, state of the art eight track.
It was a good time to be young.

But, hey, don't let me interrupt your bickering ... please, carry on.


.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

Judge and Jury said:


> Three Dog Night.
> Very underrated band.


My very first concert was Three dog night opening for The Doobie brothers.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

radikia said:


> Only based on character or lack thereof .........


I've read you.


You lack.


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Amos69 said:


> I've read you.
> 
> 
> You lack.


Coming from you that's a complement and the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me . Now run along , you have multiple acts of arson and looting to perform , er , I mean "peaceful protesting" .


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

radikia said:


> Coming from you that's a complement and the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me


WERD


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Amos69 said:


> WERD


K wanna be homes


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> I lost my virginity in the back of a '55 Chevy two-door with Three Dog Night serenading us on my brand new, state of the art eight track.
> It was a good time to be young.
> 
> But, hey, don't let me interrupt your bickering ... please, carry on.
> ...


I hear some guys liked sheeps but three dogs Is too much info for my taste . Can you please keep your “Special Occasions”private.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Trafficat said:


> Don't mix up causation and correlation. There are correlations between being a minority and being a criminal, and minority rich neighborhoods being high crime. But people are fundamentally people. Being white doesn't make you polite or impolite, and being mixed race does not make a part of town bad. When it comes to bad parts of town, it is generally the reverse that is true. Minorities do not make bad parts of town bad. They live in bad parts of town because they are bad, and they cannot afford to live in better parts. In the bad parts of town there are bad people of all races. The white meth heads there are not better, and they are there for the same reason as the minorities. They have no money.
> 
> The decline of America is correlated with racial diversity, but again, the racial diversity is not causing the decline in America but rather the reverse is true. American decline is causing racial diversity. The American schools cannot produce educated individuals because the schools are terrible, so we bring people over on visas for high paying jobs that require skills that are not taught here. Similarly, white parents are not having enough children to satisfy labor demands, so USA imports low-skilled laborers from non-white regions. They are racially diverse because they are not from here and we need them here because domestically there is a shortage of both smart people who actually know how to get things done and workers who can put in good hours doing unskilled labor... and then we have a lot of people here who are basically useless but get lots of kush jobs because they have the right connections (a.k.a. "institutional racism" since these people tend to be white, even though a white unconnected person is probably just as likely to be excluded from these jobs, if not more so thanks to affirmative action).
> 
> ...


Mexico is far from socialist, it is more free market capitalist than anything else.

However, it has been importing socialist and extreme capitalist and environmentalist ideas from the US for the past 2 decades.


----------



## Juggalo9er (Dec 7, 2017)

Amos69 said:


> My very first concert was Three dog night opening for The Doobie brothers.


Two live crew opened for icp


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Trafficat said:


> Don't mix up causation and correlation. There are correlations between being a minority and being a criminal, and minority rich neighborhoods being high crime. But people are fundamentally people. Being white doesn't make you polite or impolite, and being mixed race does not make a part of town bad. When it comes to bad parts of town, it is generally the reverse that is true. Minorities do not make bad parts of town bad. They live in bad parts of town because they are bad, and they cannot afford to live in better parts. In the bad parts of town there are bad people of all races. The white meth heads there are not better, and they are there for the same reason as the minorities. They have no money.
> 
> The decline of America is correlated with racial diversity, but again, the racial diversity is not causing the decline in America but rather the reverse is true. American decline is causing racial diversity. The American schools cannot produce educated individuals because the schools are terrible, so we bring people over on visas for high paying jobs that require skills that are not taught here. Similarly, white parents are not having enough children to satisfy labor demands, so USA imports low-skilled laborers from non-white regions. They are racially diverse because they are not from here and we need them here because domestically there is a shortage of both smart people who actually know how to get things done and workers who can put in good hours doing unskilled labor... and then we have a lot of people here who are basically useless but get lots of kush jobs because they have the right connections (a.k.a. "institutional racism" since these people tend to be white, even though a white unconnected person is probably just as likely to be excluded from these jobs, if not more so thanks to affirmative action).
> 
> ...


I think you are mixing socialism with social democracy . European countries that adopt social democracies are actually pretty happy with their system as their citizens . Average quality of life is much higher that the US by far . And please pay attention when I said “ average” because they acomódate “ all their citizens , not just a selected few. 
In the US , we said “ do not leave anyone behind, while we leave them behind every day. The failed socialism that you use as scared tactic is more like “fake populism “, very similar of what Trump offered the last 4 years.Not diferent that Putin system installed in Russia , An oligarch authoritarian system where only a few reap all the benefits . Most people that support that system think that when THEY get to power , their freedoms will be respected and there will be prosperity , when tthe example tells us the complete opposite. People’s right are not given , wee fought and conquered and after are relinquish on the name of electing a “ saviour” they will have to be fought to conquered again.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

UberPotomac said:


> I think you are mixing socialism with social democracy . European countries that adopt social democracies are actually pretty happy with their system as their citizens . Average quality of life is much higher that the US by far


USA also uses "democratic socialism" and many countries cited as being proof of the benefits of "Democratic socialism" are more free market than the USA. 



> . And please pay attention when I said “ average” because they acomódate “ all their citizens , not just a selected few.
> In the US , we said “ do not leave anyone behind, while we leave them behind every day. The failed socialism that you use as scared tactic is more like “fake populism “, very similar of what Trump offered the last 4 years.Not diferent that Putin system installed in Russia , An oligarch authoritarian system where only a few reap all the benefits . Most people that support that system think that when THEY get to power , their freedoms will be respected and there will be prosperity , when tthe example tells us the complete opposite.


History pretty much shows one thing to be true... the more the government meddles with the economy and deviates from the free market, the worse the effect is. And it doesn't matter whether you call it Democratic Socialism, Marxist Socialism, or National Socialism. The best way the government can help the economy, is by staying out of the way. Nanny states by any name simply bog things down.

I'm not sure what Trump or Putin have to do with anything. I don't like either person and both people believe in large governments that meddle with the economy. Putin is an old guard KGB man who is reinstalling socialism in Russia. Trump is a conman who was competing with Biden to buy the votes of Americans by promising the largest handouts.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Trafficat said:


> USA also uses "democratic socialism" and many countries cited as being proof of the benefits of "Democratic socialism" are more free market than the USA.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There both examples of that “fake populist nationalism” that intents to concentrate power on an individual and a selected group .
And with respect of the rol of he state , let’s not forget that what we actually call “ free market “ is not that free. The participation is restricted and the rules are designed to favor certain powers . Is more “ rigged market” than free.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

> And with respect of the rol of he state , let’s not forget that what we actually call “ free market “ is not that free. The participation is restricted and the rules are designed to favor certain powers . Is more “ rigged market” than free.


Right, the free market is rigged by the government. This is bad. The government shouldn't try to plan the economy, no matter what ideological label you pin on it.



UberPotomac said:


> There both examples of that “fake populist nationalism” that intents to concentrate power on an individual and a selected group .


Communist and socialist systems concentrate power into a small group or an individual. Even when they claim they do not in their founding documents, some pigs are always simply "more equal" than the others.

Putin is a self-proclaimed commie, although others say he is more of a fascist. 2 sides of the same coin in my view:








Russia's Putin: I've Always Liked Communist 'Ideas'


The Russian leader compared the Soviet code of ethics to the Bible.




www.newsweek.com







Vladmir Putin said:


> "I was not, as you know, a party member by necessity," he said. "I liked Communist and socialist ideas very much and I like them still."


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Trafficat said:


> Right, the free market is rigged by the government. This is bad. The government shouldn't try to plan the economy, no matter what ideological label you pin on it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In my opinion , Is mostly rigged for the lack of Government on many areas where corporations police themselves and create their own rules .


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

UberPotomac said:


> In my opinion , Is mostly rigged for the lack of Government on many areas where corporations police themselves and create their own rules .


That's not correct. The corporations mainly are granted monopoly and subsidies by the government, and the government establishes rules and regulations to increase the costs of entry to competitors. 

The most hated class of the socialists is the Petit Burgeois, or the small business owner. The government always prefers large corporations. It is easier to control a few large corporations than dozens of small firms. Furthermore, large corporations have the most capability to bribe politicians to support them.

People always talk about how evil walmart, amazon, etc. is, while at the same time passing expensive regulations that megacorporations with armies of lawyers can easily comply with while small firms cannot meet the regulatory costs. And it is no surprise, that the major corporations usually tend to be politically aligned with the "big government" party.

The corporations do "create their own rules" all the time, but not in the way you seem to be thinking. The government favorites will literally write the laws that get voted on and passed by people in government offices that stand to gain from these corporations, and thus they gain favoritism under the law. They often support laws that seem to be harsh against their own industries, knowing full well it will deal a harsher blow to their competition.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Trafficat said:


> That's not correct. The corporations mainly are granted monopoly and subsidies by the government, and the government establishes rules and regulations to increase the costs of entry to competitors.
> 
> The most hated class of the socialists is the Petit Burgeois, or the small business owner. The government always prefers large corporations. It is easier to control a few large corporations than dozens of small firms. Furthermore, large corporations have the most capability to bribe politicians to support them.
> 
> ...


When you said “ big government party “ you referí g to the Republican Party that falsely claim to not want Goverment hand on anything but at the same time is willing to monopolize and privatize services as long as long is under their control . Republicans don’t mind big Government as long as it serves the ones the deem worthy. Unfortunately , race continue to play a big factor. 
Democrats may want big Goverment with social programs .In reality there is no Party for small Goverment . Both Party just different on who benefit with Goverment intervention . Democrats tend to benefit most of the population , including many middle class and poor Republicans that benefit on that programs , while Republicans cater the favor of the wealthy and the corporations . There is that group of Republicans that end up voting against they own benefit. The last party are the Libertarians which want no Government intervention at all , but they do not carry a lot of favor.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

UberPotomac said:


> When you said “ big government party “ you referí g to the Republican Party that falsely claim to not want Goverment hand on anything but at the same time is willing to monopolize and privatize services as long as long is under their control .
> Democrats want big Goverment with social programs . In reality the era is no Party for small Goverment . Both Party just different on who benefit with Goverment intervention . Democrats tend to benefit most of the population , including many middle class and poor Republicans that benefit fir that programs , while Republicans cater the favor of the wealthy and the corporations . There is that group of Republicans that end up voting against they own benefit. The last party is the Libertarians which do not want no Government intervention at all , but does not carry a lot of favor.


Correct: There are 2 big government parties. Correct: The libertarian party is different, but has no sway.

Correct: Both parties want to benefit different groups of rich people. Republicans want to eliminate taxes on capital gains and inheritances, while Democrats want to refund the college tuition debt for people making 6 figures thanks to said degrees.

Incorrect: Democrats benefit most of the population. 

Truth: Democrats claim to benefit most of the population, while passing laws that mainly benefit the largest corporations and make small businesses nearly impossible to run. Sure, they give handouts to poor people, including many poor republicans that would be ostensibly be better off on public assistance. But maybe they would be even better off, if the economic environment favored the creation of new businesses instead of just protecting existing companies. Competition for labor fosters wage growth. Stiff labor laws disfavor small companies. In a twist of irony, stiff labor laws may thus reduce prevailing wages by concentrating labor to a handful of larger employers instead of a multitude of smaller ones.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

radikia said:


> You shouldn't be . Are you comfortably with your grammar skills ? Having your own meth lab doesn't mean you have a degree in Chemistry . Apparently you were doing more than simply mixing chemicals or maybe you just didn't wear a mask while doing it . Even the oldest baby boomers born in 1946 would only have started having children around 1970 and their children would be having children starting in 1990 . I don't consider a 41 year old to be a millennial and neither does anyone else , millennials are only now entering their 30's . As far as identification is concerned , snowflakes are much easier to spot , especially during the summer months and because they are so easily triggered .


What you 'consider reality' and what is ' actual reality' are two different things. Obviously there is some fuzzy lines between demographic cohorts, but Milllennials are were born from 1980 to 2000, so the vast MAJORITY of them have boomer parents. Especially when you consider GenX'ers typically had children later in life (i.e. many/most were in their 30s before they started having kids)


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> What you 'consider reality' and what is ' actual reality' are two different things.


My oldest niece is 20 yrs old and she is a millennial as are her two younger sisters .


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

radikia said:


> My oldest niece is 20 yrs old and she is a millennial as are her two younger sisters .


Well, we could agree on definitions. You might have to recalibrate:
Millennials were born between 1981 to 1996 being a widely accepted defining range for the generation.

(Your oldest Niece is on the border, and more like GenZ, ditto my children born 2003 and 2004, I'm a GenX (early 1970s) and my parents were the cusp of the Baby Boomers (late 1940s.)








Millennials - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




Clearly we are not on the same page.
And you are more about slinging insults.
Have a nice day.


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> Well, we could agree on definitions. (Your oldest Niece is on the border, and more like GenZ, ditto my children born 2003 and 2004, I'm a GenX)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Clearly you do not know a generation is 20-25 years long . Baby boomers started being born in 1946 after WW II , so Gen X started being born from 1966 to 1971 (which is when me and my two sisters were born ), so millennials started being born around 1986 to 1991 (which brings us to my nieces) . Feel free to show me where you can squeeze in Gen Y and Gen Z . I wouldn't sling insults if you had an open mind and weren't completely dismissive of any and all other opinions . Have a good day lefty


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

radikia said:


> Clearly you do not know a generation is 20-25 years long . Baby boomers started being born in 1946 after WW II , so Gen X started being born from 1966 to 1971 (which is when me and my two sisters were born ), so millennials started being born around 1986 to 1991 (which brings us to my nieces) . Feel free to show me where you can squeeze in Gen Y and Gen Z . I wouldn't sling insults if you had an open mind and weren't completely dismissive of any and all other opinions . Have a good day lefty


OK, if you want to make up arbitrary rules. Have at it. Please show me some kind of sources for your definitions. You seem to be marinating in your own 'alternative facts.'
Oh, and by the way GenY and Millennial are the SAME THING. Two names for the same generation.
I would be less dismissive, if you gave me any cogent reason to be so...


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> OK, if you want to make up arbitrary rules. Have at it. Please show me some kind of sources for your definitions. You seem to be marinating in your own 'alternative facts.'
> Oh, and by the way GenY and Millennial are the SAME THING. Two names for the same generation.
> I would be less dismissive, if you gave me any cogent reason to be so...


Really ? Where does Gen Z fit in then ? I would have better luck teaching a donkey to fly by trying to push it off a cliff . Oh and btw my numbers work very well , Gen Z babies started being born from 2006 to 2010 which happen to be the ages of my other sister's children .


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

radikia said:


> Really ? Where does Gen Z fit in then ?


Clearly you are challenged on clicking the Wikipedia link I embedded above, which outlines Millennials as well as adjacent generations and how demographers typically understand and use these labels.

Here, let me help you out with that:

*Generation Z* (or *Gen Z* for short), colloquially also known as *zoomers*,[1][2] is the demographic cohort succeeding Millennials and preceding Generation Alpha. Researchers and popular media use the mid-to-late 1990s as starting birth years and the early 2010s (1997 - 2012) as ending birth years. Most members of Generation Z are children of Generation X.[3]









Generation Z - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## radikia (Sep 15, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> Wikipedia in non-partisan, non political information is pretty good.
> But if it satisfies your ego to not believe the consensus, then so be it.
> Enjoy your alternate universe.


Since you like Wikipedia so much , here's a link for you . It says a generation is "generally considered to be about 20–⁠30 years , during which children are born and grow up, become adults, and begin to have children ." Which is pretty much what I said and backs up my numbers almost to a tee ! You are among those who believe if they keep repeating something over and over again , it must be true . Talk about an alternate universe .









Generation - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

If you scroll down on your own link, @radikia you will see all the GENERATIONS laid out, just so we are on the same page.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

observer said:


> Mexico is far from socialist, it is more free market capitalist than anything else.
> 
> However, it has been importing socialist and extreme capitalist and environmentalist ideas from the US for the past 2 decades.


Mexico is probably a good example of capitalism run amok.
It's what capitalism looks like with no rules, no lanes.

.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

UberPotomac said:


> I hear some guys liked sheeps but three dogs Is too much info for my taste . Can you please keep your “Special Occasions”private.


A "three dog night" is what the Aleut people used to call a long Alaska night (days long) when the weather was really bad. They would sleep and shelter with their dogs to keep warm; and a really cold night required three dogs.
No sheep up there.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> A "three dog night" is what the Aleut people used to call a long Alaska night (days long) when the weather was really bad. They would sleep and shelter with their dogs to keep warm; and a really cold night required three dogs.
> No sheep up there.


Ok then .


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> It’s a statistical average, not meant to apply to any one individual. I just find the irony of the Boomers complaining about Millennials when they raised them!


I blame it the destruction of the “nuclear family,” a family unit consisting of a mother and father and their children, when mom was allowed to stay home to raise the family because dad’s job could pay the mortgage and put food on the table. But then bigger government came along, and higher taxes meant both dad & mom had to work, as the fem-nazis cheered it on. Along came no-fault divorce, cheese-block incentives, school indoctrination, government-run day care, and the list goes on.
Shit-hole surroundings lead to shit-hole manners, and it’s only gonna get worse.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

Judge and Jury said:


> "Please" generally means to feel happy or satisfied.
> 
> When you ask someone to "please" do something, you are asking them to feel happy or satisfied to complete your request.
> 
> ...


Please comes from plea, as does plead. When you say please, you pleading to the other persons kinder side.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

Trafficat said:


> Don't mix up causation and correlation. There are correlations between being a minority and being a criminal, and minority rich neighborhoods being high crime. But people are fundamentally people. Being white doesn't make you polite or impolite, and being mixed race does not make a part of town bad. When it comes to bad parts of town, it is generally the reverse that is true. Minorities do not make bad parts of town bad. They live in bad parts of town because they are bad, and they cannot afford to live in better parts. In the bad parts of town there are bad people of all races. The white meth heads there are not better, and they are there for the same reason as the minorities. They have no money.
> 
> The decline of America is correlated with racial diversity, but again, the racial diversity is not causing the decline in America but rather the reverse is true. American decline is causing racial diversity. The American schools cannot produce educated individuals because the schools are terrible, so we bring people over on visas for high paying jobs that require skills that are not taught here. Similarly, white parents are not having enough children to satisfy labor demands, so USA imports low-skilled laborers from non-white regions. They are racially diverse because they are not from here and we need them here because domestically there is a shortage of both smart people who actually know how to get things done and workers who can put in good hours doing unskilled labor... and then we have a lot of people here who are basically useless but get lots of kush jobs because they have the right connections (a.k.a. "institutional racism" since these people tend to be white, even though a white unconnected person is probably just as likely to be excluded from these jobs, if not more so thanks to affirmative action).
> 
> ...


I believe “understanding causation and correlation” is an elitist principle and was CANCELLED due to the pandemic.


----------



## Kilroy4303 (Jul 31, 2020)

UberPotomac said:


> Really .Do you really want to go there ?
> 
> There is a reason why minorities used to be poor and uneducated . Fortunately that is starting to change . Do you want to know why we feel we losing manners?
> Because presently we have record number of uneducated ignorant racist white population that use to be educated middle class.


Being respectful and polite and courteous HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE OR EDUCATION.

Don't turn this into something its not.


----------



## Kilroy4303 (Jul 31, 2020)

BallinBruha said:


> ?? Are you serious ? Trolling ?
> 
> You don’t know what please means ?


Saying please is a polite way of saying or asking for help or a moment of their time to assist them or help them to accomplish some task , whether it be moving slightly so they can reach an object or thing, or just taking a moment of their time to complete an action.

I hope he is trolling and trying to be a smart ass, because if he is not, it is a perfect example why this discussion started.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Kilroy4303 said:


> Being respectful and polite and courteous HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE OR EDUCATION.
> 
> Don't turn this into something its not.


Of course it does . Not talking about it , doesn’t solve the problem . For as long as we continue in denial, we can start to heal . Ignoring and acting like race is not a factor definitely does not help .


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Uber's Guber said:


> I blame it the destruction of the “nuclear family,” a family unit consisting of a mother and father and their children, when mom was allowed to stay home to raise the family because dad’s job could pay the mortgage and put food on the table. But then bigger government came along, and higher taxes meant both dad & mom had to work, as the fem-nazis cheered it on. Along came no-fault divorce, cheese-block incentives, school indoctrination, government-run day care, and the list goes on.
> Shit-hole surroundings lead to shit-hole manners, and it’s only gonna get worse.


The ecosystem necessary for the NUCLEAR family to work was an anomoly. Striving to get back there is futile. For most of human history, the family was extended and communal, not separated immediate family.









The Nuclear Family Was a Mistake


The family structure we’ve held up as the cultural ideal for the past half century has been a catastrophe for many. It’s time to figure out better ways to live together.




www.theatlantic.com


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Trafficat said:


> Don't mix up causation and correlation. There are correlations between being a minority and being a criminal, and minority rich neighborhoods being high crime. But people are fundamentally people. Being white doesn't make you polite or impolite, and being mixed race does not make a part of town bad. When it comes to bad parts of town, it is generally the reverse that is true. Minorities do not make bad parts of town bad. They live in bad parts of town because they are bad, and they cannot afford to live in better parts. In the bad parts of town there are bad people of all races. The white meth heads there are not better, and they are there for the same reason as the minorities. They have no money.
> 
> The decline of America is correlated with racial diversity, but again, the racial diversity is not causing the decline in America but rather the reverse is true. American decline is causing racial diversity. The American schools cannot produce educated individuals because the schools are terrible, so we bring people over on visas for high paying jobs that require skills that are not taught here. Similarly, white parents are not having enough children to satisfy labor demands, so USA imports low-skilled laborers from non-white regions. They are racially diverse because they are not from here and we need them here because domestically there is a shortage of both smart people who actually know how to get things done and workers who can put in good hours doing unskilled labor... and then we have a lot of people here who are basically useless but get lots of kush jobs because they have the right connections (a.k.a. "institutional racism" since these people tend to be white, even though a white unconnected person is probably just as likely to be excluded from these jobs, if not more so thanks to affirmative action).
> 
> ...


Nicely put, Wrong, but nicely put


Minorities do not make bad parts of town bad. They live in bad parts of town because they are bad,
The real cause of decline in America is the slow adoption of socialism
white liberals who hate white people
importation of people who are educated in socialism

Where do you get this nonsense??

You are trying to explain the decline of America when America is not in decline. and you are blaming socialism when you dont even know what the word means


----------



## Kilroy4303 (Jul 31, 2020)

UberPotomac said:


> Of course it does . Not talking about it , doesn’t solve the problem . For as long as we continue in denial, we can start to heal . Ignoring and acting like race is not a factor definitely does not help .


Its how you were raised pure and simple, adding race to the equation does nothing more than pander to the masses that blame their issues on something else.

You don't have to be a certain race or education level to understand being. polite or courteous, or having respect.
That's like saying that because you are this race or that race you are more prone to being entitled, or violent, or egotistical etc. Behavior is taught and learned. Its how you were raised pure and simple.

Trying to blame it on race is just another excuse to push your personal responsibility on some other factor.
At some time in your life you have to take ownership of how you act and your behavior.

and similar to what you said acting like race and education has a bearing on personal responsibility for ones actions does not help. Grow up and take ownership of how you behave. 

(in other words.. .. . .. The golden rule . .. treat others how you wish to be treated. . .or do we ignore and pretend that doesn't exist also)


----------



## bone-aching-work (Jul 12, 2020)

There's so much gaslighting here, it's ridiculous.

When you take Western Whites out of Western Civilization, there is no more Western Civilization. Western norms of social interaction are in the package.

People want to pretend that we aren't in the middle of a classic top-to-bottom genocide here. Why can't White people even be shown in advertisements anymore?



> The results are stunning from a spreadsheet of TV commercials over a 4 month period. White men have all but disappeared.
> 
> When they are in commercials they are either old, ugly and sick or they are the partner of a black woman and have no speaking part. In 3 of the commercials the white men are doing laundry and are paired with a little girl to whom they are delivering the clean clothes. There were zero commercials of white fathers and sons. None!
> 
> ...


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

bone-aching-work said:


> There's so much gaslighting here, it's ridiculous.
> 
> When you take Western Whites out of Western Civilization, there is no more Western Civilization. Western norms of social interaction are in the package.
> 
> People want to pretend that we aren't in the middle of a classic top-to-bottom genocide here. Why can't White people even be shown in advertisements anymore?


That whole statement smacks of the ginned up "War on Christmas" Paranoia peddled by the Right leaning Cable News.


----------



## bone-aching-work (Jul 12, 2020)

oldfart said:


> You are trying to explain the decline of America when America is not in decline.


America is most definitely in decline, oldfart. Steep decline.









Mob twerks on ambulance as paramedics work on couple who were shot


A group of women were seen twerking on top of an ambulance in Oakland. EMT's were attempting to make their way to the scene of a shooting. The emergency vehicle was blocked from progressing.




www.dailymail.co.uk







> Multiple women were seen twerking on the top of an ambulance in Lake Merritt in Oakland, California on Saturday night, as paramedics attempted to make their way through to the scene of a shooting in which one person was killed and at least seven others were wounded.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Kilroy4303 said:


> Its how you were raised pure and simple, adding race to the equation does nothing more than pander to the masses that blame their issues on something else.
> 
> You don't have to be a certain race or education level to understand being. polite or courteous, or having respect.
> That's like saying that because you are this race or that race you are more prone to being entitled, or violent, or egotistical etc. Behavior is taught and learned. Its how you were raised pure and simple.
> ...


Life is so simple when you see it thru a narrow lens of white privileged . I can try to stay an explain , but we both know you would not understand .


----------



## Kilroy4303 (Jul 31, 2020)

UberPotomac said:


> Life is so simple when you see it thru a narrow lens of white privileged . I can try to stay an explain , but we both know you would not understand .


No, that's okay, I have heard the typical excuses for not taking responsibilities of your actions. Continue to perpetuate the exact reason that society is the way it is today. Blame it on some one else or something else to justify your sense of entitlement in acting however you choose with out repercussion.

I have not yet once used race to justify my actions or words, nor would I 
It isn't an issue. . .. so stop trying to make it one to justify your viewpoint. Its putting a square peg in a round hole, it doesn't fit. No matter how hard you hammer it.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> You are trying to explain the decline of America when America is not in decline. and you are blaming socialism when you dont even know what the word means


A rose by any other name smells just as sweet, and a centrally planned economy is always sour no matter what name you call it. 

Call it communism, fascism, socialism, "social democracy", "nationalization of industry" or whatever and it all basically boils down to the same thing. The government controls and manages the industry (the "means of production"), chooses winners and losers, and everyone will be poorer as a result. "From each their ability, to each their needs..." Also known as slavery. 

Whatever you call it, you are giving up your independence, liberty, and wealth, in the name of letting state bureaucrats run everything because somehow they supposedly know better how to manage factories and farms and distribute goods and services than people who are say, engineers, businessmen, farmers, truckers, and others in manufacturing, mining, agriculture, logistics, and others who are used to selling products and services for that old dirty word "profit".


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

bone-aching-work said:


> There's so much gaslighting here, it's ridiculous.
> 
> When you take Western Whites out of Western Civilization, there is no more Western Civilization. Western norms of social interaction are in the package.
> 
> People want to pretend that we aren't in the middle of a classic top-to-bottom genocide here. Why can't White people even be shown in advertisements anymore?


What are you talking about ? What liberties are been taking from white people! How you been silenced ? 
“Being silence” and “people dont like what you saying” are too different things . 
Your word are no gospel anymore . People think and make their own mind . Your values do not precede anyone else’s . That is not being canceled or repressed . Welcome to the world . WH we re you just cannot impose YOUR beliefs on others .


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

5,4,3,2.............


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Trafficat said:


> A rose by any other name smells just as sweet, and a centrally planned economy is always sour no matter what name you call it.
> 
> Call it communism, fascism, socialism, "social democracy", "nationalization of industry" or whatever and it all basically boils down to the same thing. The government controls and manages the industry (the "means of production"), chooses winners and losers, and everyone will be poorer as a result. "From each their ability, to each their needs..." Also known as slavery.
> 
> Whatever you call it, you are giving up your independence, liberty, and wealth, in the name of letting state bureaucrats run everything because somehow they supposedly know better how to manage factories and farms and distribute goods and services than people who are say, engineers, businessmen, farmers, truckers, and others in manufacturing, mining, agriculture, logistics, and others who are used to selling products and services for that old dirty word "profit".


as I said, you dont know what the word means.

I guess what you long for is laissez faire capitalism which is just as bad as anything else taken to the extreme


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> as I said, you dont know what the word means.
> 
> I guess what you long for is laissez faire capitalism which is just as bad as anything else taken to the extreme
> View attachment 601618


Try the dictionary: 
Google via Oxford dictionary defines Socialism as follows:


> a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.


I think it's pretty clear. You can try and say how your socialism is different or find some excuse how socialism that fails is not real socialism, but at the end of the day it's always a loser of strategy no matter how you try and sugar coat it. Central planning = bad. Laissez Fiare = Good. And it really doesn't matter if you are rich or poor. Laissez Faire helps the poor more than socialism.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

Trafficat said:


> Try the dictionary:
> Google via Oxford dictionary defines Socialism as follows:
> 
> 
> I think it's pretty clear. You can try and say how your socialism is different or find some excuse how socialism that fails is not real socialism, but at the end of the day it's always a loser of strategy no matter how you try and sugar coat it. Central planning = bad. Laissez Fiare = Good. And it really doesn't matter if you are rich or poor. Laissez Faire helps the poor more than socialism.


WAIT!!!!!! Always?


looks around the real world.


----------



## Kilroy4303 (Jul 31, 2020)

Amos69 said:


> WAIT!!!!!! Always?
> 
> 
> looks around the real world.


I think I smell sarcasm .. . .


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Trafficat said:


> Try the dictionary:
> Google via Oxford dictionary defines Socialism as follows:
> 
> 
> I think it's pretty clear. You can try and say how your socialism is different or find some excuse how socialism that fails is not real socialism, but at the end of the day it's always a loser of strategy no matter how you try and sugar coat it. Central planning = bad. Laissez Fiare = Good. And it really doesn't matter if you are rich or poor. Laissez Faire helps the poor more than socialism.


I take issue with calling a government that “regulates” the means of production, socialist

you have quoted the Oxford dictionary Here’s what Merriam - Webster says
*definition of socialism*

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

No mention of regulation and of course it’s regulations that are needed to temper the excessse of capitalism That and to expand the purpose of corporations beyond just profit for the shareholders to serve all the stakeholders (employees, customers and the community at large

that’s not socialism, that’s capitalism with a purpose


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> I take issue with calling a government that “regulates” the means of production, socialist


A distinction without a meaning. A regulation is taking a privately owned company and pointing a gun at them and saying "do what I say or I will shut you down. We will fine you, take away your licenses, and then arrest if you if you do not stop, and kill you if you resist arrest" (Common in fascist "national socialism") versus installing your own government company (communist socialism) that does what it says because the leader is a government employee, who you tell "do what I say or I will fire you and replace you with someone else who will". 

Either way, the government is "controlling" the means of production. It fits the definition you provided unless you want to get semantical over "ownership". Collectively, private companies are controlled by laws and administered by bureaucrats either way. Whether the company is private or public on paper is more of a de jure thing than a de facto matter of reality. Many socialists / social democrats / "insert politically correct leftist ideology name here" also in fact favor direct nationalization of industries. Just listen to Bernie Sanders. Even de jure, the socialists want socialism where the government actively owns the companies, even though it has the same effect as micromanaging them through laws, subsidies, etc. There are some benefits to nationalizing a company for de jure government ownership versus de facto government control... Like exempting them from regulations that cripple private industry and anti-trust laws etc. Anti-trust laws are meant to prevent a company from being too powerful, but if the company is basically an arm of the government, then you don't want competition anyways.

Before you say "Oh sanders is just 1 democrat, no others are like him" consider that this might not be exactly true. Sure, he's the main guy who has talked about directly nationalizing factories and hospitals... But a lot of regulations amount to prohibitions on private services and directly move what could be private into exclusively public domains. Like all the anti-homeschooling laws and anti-private schooling laws. The idea is that only the government should run schools, because I guess private schools might teach the wrong stuff, or maybe rich white kids will go there and get an unfair advantage over poor kids who go to public school. It seems like when I'm talking to "moderate social democrats" or whatever they call themselves, they seem to reveal that they are okay with the nationalization of basically everything, in due time. Isn't that what progressivism is all about? Progressively giving the government greater control over just about everything until one day you can just step in and have the government directly manage it all to make it all egalitarian? All in the name of eliminanting the pay gap between the rich and poor, the gender pay gap, the racial pay gap, and to eliminate all the exploitation of workers.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

Trafficat said:


> A distinction without a meaning. A regulation is taking a privately owned company and pointing a gun at them and saying "do what I say or I will shut you down. We will fine you, take away your licenses, and then arrest if you if you do not stop, and kill you if you resist arrest" (Common in fascist "national socialism") versus installing your own government company (communist socialism) that does what it says because the leader is a government employee, who you tell "do what I say or I will fire you and replace you with someone else who will".
> 
> Either way, the government is "controlling" the means of production. It fits the definition you provided unless you want to get semantical over "ownership". Collectively, private companies are controlled by laws and administered by bureaucrats either way. Whether the company is private or public on paper is more of a de jure thing than a de facto matter of reality. Many socialists / social democrats / "insert politically correct leftist ideology name here" also in fact favor direct nationalization of industries. Just listen to Bernie Sanders. Even de jure, the socialists want socialism where the government actively owns the companies, even though it has the same effect as micromanaging them through laws, subsidies, etc. There are some benefits to nationalizing a company for de jure government ownership versus de facto government control... Like exempting them from regulations that cripple private industry and anti-trust laws etc. Anti-trust laws are meant to prevent a company from being too powerful, but if the company is basically an arm of the government, then you don't want competition anyways.
> 
> Before you say "Oh sanders is just 1 democrat, no others are like him" consider that this might not be exactly true. Sure, he's the main guy who has talked about directly nationalizing factories and hospitals... But a lot of regulations amount to prohibitions on private services and directly move what could be private into exclusively public domains. Like all the anti-homeschooling laws and anti-private schooling laws. The idea is that only the government should run schools, because I guess private schools might teach the wrong stuff, or maybe rich white kids will go there and get an unfair advantage over poor kids who go to public school. It seems like when I'm talking to "moderate social democrats" or whatever they call themselves, they seem to reveal that they are okay with the nationalization of basically everything, in due time. Isn't that what progressivism is all about? Progressively giving the government greater control over just about everything until one day you can just step in and have the government directly manage it all to make it all egalitarian? All in the name of eliminanting the pay gap between the rich and poor, the gender pay gap, the racial pay gap, and to eliminate all the exploitation of workers.


LULZ.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

"We aren't socialists because we don't believe the government should "own" the companies. Well, except in these specific constantly evolving list of industries that we have identified where the goverment should own them. We just think the government should set the wages the companies set, the exact working conditions, break durations, vacation times, and benefits each employee gets, and tell the companies who they can hire and who they cannot hire, how many of each type of person they should hire, what licenses those people they hire have to have, what products and services they can make and do, and what they cannot make and do, where they can build and sell their products and where they can or cannot, and how they make what they make, and to who they can or cannot sell the things they make. Government employees will even be there to make sure you are following all of the rules. And of course we dictate how many restrooms each company can have for each gender and how often and how they are cleaned and whether customers and employees are allowed to smoke or drink or wear masks or carry guns and what times you can be opened or closed. Also we think we have a right to say how much money can be charged for any given thing and how much of that thing customers are allowed to buy. And of course, we can also set the max amount of income that the people who "own" the company make, make rules forcing companies to split if they get too big, and generally manage every single aspect of everything. We also believe in giving government subsidy to fund companies with tax dollars and in distributing redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor. But we totes believe in "private" ownership of companies... so we aren't socialists, even though we only believe in giving them about as much autonomy as a government appointed manager should have over a government firm... maybe even less autonomy because you can't trust those greedy profiteers."


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

kdyrpr said:


> A direct result of people with their head buried in their phones. You can still get it from the older generations. We were raised by humans.


No. They just text the order in.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Judge and Jury said:


> Do you realize that all human species originated in East Africa?
> 
> Like it or not, we are all blood brothers due to a great, great grandma from long, long ago.


That certainly is an interesting theory.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

In my opinion one of the biggest problems with society today is everyone wants their *rights*. However they have lost all *respect* and *responsibility*.

I call them the 3 *R's*, they all work together. You have your *rights*, you also need *respect* and *responsibility* to have a harmonious society. All 3 are equally important in my opinion.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

Everyone seems down for their rights, but don't give a damn about others rights.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

“And it really doesn't matter if you are rich or poor”

Jajajajajja 

Why even bother reply.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

UberPotomac said:


> “And it really doesn't matter if you are rich or poor”
> 
> Jajajajajja
> 
> Why even bother reply.


*“And it really doesn't matter if you are rich or poor”*

As long as you are happy and secure. 

Lots of peoples live austere life styles and do not generate much income but are very content.


I make lots of money, I often have much on my mind.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Amos69 said:


> *“And it really doesn't matter if you are rich or poor”*
> 
> As long as you are happy and secure.
> 
> ...


 It is not about accumulating wealth . It his about the people that everyday struggle to survive . 
For people with means it may be a choice to live austere but for the poor is not a choice . 

It is about the lack of understanding how other people lives es may not be similar as ours.
We don’t have to agree. Just try to understand and respect ,and occasionally help if we can, instead of talk of them like a contagious desease.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

UberPotomac said:


> It is not about accumulating wealth . It his about the people that everyday struggle to survive .
> For people with means it may be a choice to live austere but for the poor is not a choice .
> 
> It is about the lack of understanding how other people lives es may not be similar as ours.
> We don’t have to agree. Just try to understand and respect ,and occasionally help if we can, instead of talk of them like a contagious desease.


I think the difference is between those that struggle and those that don't try.

I don't mind giving those that try a hand up. 

I do mind paying for a loafer.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

UberPotomac said:


> It is not about accumulating wealth . It his about the people that everyday struggle to survive .
> For people with means it may be a choice to live austere but for the poor is not a choice .
> 
> It is about the lack of understanding how other people lives es may not be similar as ours.
> We don’t have to agree. Just try to understand and respect ,and occasionally help if we can, instead of talk of them like a contagious desease.


So the question is Why? Why do some people thrive, and others struggle?


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

Amos69 said:


> So the question is Why? Why do some people thrive, and others struggle?


First define Thrive . Different people , different outcomes . 
One reason is different starting points , support , learned skills, education , family. 
In my opinion , we should recognize and value different outcomes . We just need to try that all people reach a minimum level of comfort . The rest is up to them .
Kind of , you can eat everyday , if you want steak,you’ll have to excel to pay fir it.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

Amos69 said:


> So the question is Why? Why do some people thrive, and others struggle?


Some people want more and put the effort in, others are just okay with the status quo and accept it.

I grew up in the projects, my dad was non existent from the early 80's, my mom was disabled from a car accident in the early 70's. I lived in the same nasty apartments as the other poor people. I walked to the same school as they did. We all had the same opportunities, I choose to take advantage of them for a better way of life, many I grew up with choose to live like they were living. Many are still living that way, still milking the system, still living in the government aid apartments they grew up in.

I worked my butt off from the time I was 13 and could start delivering newspapers. I bought my first house when I was 19 and moved my mom out of that nasty place. I was determined to make a better life for myself. No one gave me anything, if anything people tried to hold me back saying it was not possible to get out of the projects.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

FLKeys said:


> Some people want more and put the effort in, others are just okay with the status quo and accept it.
> 
> I grew up in the projects, my dad was non existent from the early 80's, my mom was disabled from a car accident in the early 70's. I lived in the same nasty apartments as the other poor people. I walked to the same school as they did. We all had the same opportunities, I choose to take advantage of them for a better way of life, many I grew up with choose to live like they were living. Many are still living that way, still milking the system, still living in the government aid apartments they grew up in.
> 
> I worked my butt off from the time I was 13 and could start delivering newspapers. I bought my first house when I was 19 and moved my mom out of that nasty place. I was determined to make a better life for myself. No one gave me anything, if anything people tried to hold me back saying it was not possible to get out of the projects.


And that was YOUR CHOICE . It was MY CHOICE But do they need to starve because 
they didn’t choose to do what you and I did?
We all should have access to housing , health care a basic food needs. From there should be up to the individual . 
But that is not what is all about . Keeping that people down , get us cheap labor, and fill out jails to enrich some corrupt politicians and their chronies .


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

UberPotomac said:


> And that was YOUR CHOICE . It was MY CHOICE But do they need to starve because they didn’t choose to do what you and I did?


Starve no. Milk the system while having new cars, top of the line smart phones, tablets, full package cable, super fast internet, etc etc. At some point one has to wonder why they have so much from so little.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

FLKeys said:


> Starve no. Milk the system while having new cars, top of the line smart phones, tablets, full package cable, super fast internet, etc etc. At some point one has to wonder why they have so much from so little.


No doubt , the system is far from perfect . 
But how many are they? Not the majority . 
Should we just dismantle a system that try to benefit so many , or we just try to fix the abuses ?


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

UberPotomac said:


> No doubt , the system is far from perfect .
> But how many are they? Not the majority .
> Should we just dismantle a system that try to benefit so many , or we just try to fix the abuses ?


The right generally exaggerates the 'abuse of the system' to dismantle the system (See: Welfare Queen) -- Don't Let PERFECT be the enemy of GOOD ENOUGH.
The left generally accepts that there is a 5% 'cost of doing business' abuse, and that if the system can be optimized to not exceed that threshold, then society is a better place -- Spending billions to police a system is dumb, hence the DEFUND THE POLICE movement. Not that the left doesn't want law enforcement, its more a 'should we spend THIS MUCH on something which works just as good by only spending 1/4 the amount, and put the extra funds into more specialized services like Mental Health and Drug Addiction special workers.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

UberPotomac said:


> No doubt , the system is far from perfect .
> But how many are they? Not the majority .
> Should we just dismantle a system that try to benefit so many , or we just try to fix the abuses ?


There are way more than there should be. Wish I knew the answers. I honestly don't think it should be a completely free ride. Community service should be in order. There are many roadsides, parks, beaches and government owned properties that need to be cleaned up. You know pick-up garbage, clean up or paint over graffiti, etc, etc.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

FLKeys said:


> There are way more than there should be. Wish I knew the answers. I honestly don't think it should be a completely free ride. Community service should be in order. There are many roadsides, parks, beaches and government owned properties that need to be cleaned up. You know pick-up garbage, clean up or paint over graffiti, etc, etc.


I do not disagree. A job is much more than a paycheck.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

UberPotomac said:


> I do not disagree. A job is much more than a paycheck.


This is why I hate the ideal of low income housing blocks. We did this in the past and nowadays they are the Ghetto. Segregate the homeless and low level public housed to communities. Give them a public job with the low income home, and perhaps they will start to learn better habits. Forcing them to congregate in failure only breeds a continuation of this poor mindset.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Amos69 said:


> This is why I hate the ideal of low income housing blocks. We did this in the past and nowadays they are the Ghetto. Segregate the homeless and low level public housed to communities. Give them a public job with the low income home, and perhaps they will start to learn better habits. Forcing them to congregate in failure only breeds a continuation of this poor mindset.


In Toronto, there has been a very active effort to put people on public housing into communities where there are middle and affluent owners. For this exact reason, you develop better contacts, you see a better example, and you have role models to help lift you up. I have not seen stats on whether or not this is working, but the idea is sound.


----------

