The Only Patriotic Choice for President

[Nationalist]

24 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Still not American pedo 

And in the aggregate we have more freedom (particularly financial) in Canada 

The rest of your post is just the unfounded nonsense you usually spout

Hmmm...does a home owner actually own his/her property in Canada?

[impartialobserver]

5 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Well, invertebrates like you are generally ignored, but sometimes you get a real take in there, and that's worth stomping on for a while. 

"Stomping".. it is comical that you think that this internet forum has any impact on myself or the issues. You vastly overestimate your impact.. I guess it helps your fragile ego. In the meantime.. presently I am working to get employers refunds on their overpaid taxes. That has impact. Your angry, bitter, self righteousness online postings have zero impact. 

you have an odd way of ignoring myself.. reflexively responding with near perfect predictability is not ignoring. 

Edited October 7, 2024 by impartialobserver

[SkyHigh]

19 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Because you're a Canadian Marxist b*tch on an American thread. You can't help yourself.  

So predictable 

Exactly like I said, ignore everything I say, then just continue to make shit up.

Even you have to know how pathetic you look 

 

[SkyHigh]

5 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Hmmm...does a home owner actually own his/her property in Canada?

There are definitely issues in Canada, lack of true property rights being one 

But if you noticed, I said "in the aggregate" I'll give you the time to google that, then I'll accept your apology 

[Deluge]

4 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

So predictable 

Exactly like I said, ignore everything I say, then just continue to make shit up.

Even you have to know how pathetic you look 

I do? Lets revisit:

"I'm an ardent capitalist, that has built and sold two companies. I'm more a proponent of a PPP model of capitalism and I believe in regulations but I'm strongly opposed to any form of communism."

If you're an ardent capitalist, then why in the f*ck are you asking whether I understand Marxism? lol

[Deluge]

57 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

What's funny is I actually read the communist manifesto before coming to the conclusion that I thought Marxism was a ridiculous economic system.

And yet here are, trying to quiz me on Marxism, anyways. lol

You've got yourself a little paradox, pervert. 

What are you trying to peddle? 

[SkyHigh]

9 minutes ago, Deluge said:

I do? Lets revisit:

"I'm an ardent capitalist, that has built and sold two companies. I'm more a proponent of a PPP model of capitalism and I believe in regulations but I'm strongly opposed to any form of communism."

If you're an ardent capitalist, then why in the f*ck are you asking whether I understand Marxism? lol

I was just curious if you even understood the insults you throw around so freely. You don't 

So you can read, yet I'm sure you'll just call me a Marxist again. Funny though, I'd bet money you have and will depend on the government much , much, much more than me.

 

[Nationalist]

19 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

There are definitely issues in Canada, lack of true property rights being one 

But if you noticed, I said "in the aggregate" I'll give you the time to google that, then I'll accept your apology 

Well well well. No wonder replies to you are generally nasty. Personally, I prefer to try civility until I get insulted...then I return the sentiments. You go right to the mud-slinging. OK.

I don't need to look up "aggregate". Nor do I apologize to sh1tty little pricks. 

Have a warm and fuzzy day.

[SkyHigh]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

And yet here are, trying to quiz me on Marxism, anyways. lol

You've got yourself a little paradox, pervert. 

What are you trying to peddle? 

And you failed the quiz 

My point is, and always has been, that when you use words that you not only don't understand but aren't applicable (in either their true meaning or even your proprietary definitions) to the people or problems you're arguing against, well you just sound foolish 

You've spent the last bunch of posts just calling me something I'm diametrically opposed to and even if I did agree with Karl still wouldn't be relevant to anything happening in North America today 

Calling Kamala a Marxist is the same as calling Trump a fascist, ignorant, lazy and deluginal 

[SkyHigh]

8 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Well well well. No wonder replies to you are generally nasty. Personally, I prefer to try civility until I get insulted...then I return the sentiments. You go right to the mud-slinging. OK.

I don't need to look up "aggregate". Nor do I apologize to sh1tty little pricks. 

Have a warm and fuzzy day.

If you think your previous interjection was an honest attempt at civil conversation, I wish you a warm and fuzzy day as well.

But if you truly want to have a genuine conversation take the time to actually read my posts. I intentionally used the word aggregate as a means to identify the fact I'm aware that it's not as simple as Canada is better, it's a complex issue ( even the term freedom is subjective) with alot of nuisance. 

To me you're original response, negated the nuisances I included and seemed more like an attempt to score some meaningless point, if mistaken I sincerely apologize and look forward to a fruitful conversation, but the "shitty little pricks" comment makes me doubt that is your objective, as I don't believe my "google it" comment necessitated such language.

Balls in your court sir.

[impartialobserver]

1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

What's funny is I actually read the communist manifesto before coming to the conclusion that I thought Marxism was a ridiculous economic system. I'd bet money that you've never actually read anything on Marxism and simply regurgitate things you've heard from the likes of Tucker Carlson. 

So all you can do is rant like an unhinged lunatic , making assertions you not only can't support but go against everything I've ever posted here. Because you got nothing else 

Sad little pervert 

I read Das Kapital from cover to cover in undergrad. So when I criticize it.. I actually know what I am talking about much like yourself. Interesting how universities are so liberal and yet my professor (female and liberal) tore Marx's theories to pieces. She thought that he was a waste of our time but knew that everybody would demand that we study him. 

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

I was just curious if you even understood the insults you throw around so freely. You don't 

So you can read, yet I'm sure you'll just call me a Marxist again. Funny though, I'd bet money you have and will depend on the government much , much, much more than me.

 

I see. 

So you're just an educated guy who's offended by my understanding of Marxism. 

How Marxist of you to notice.  

You know, it's been said that Jesus Christ was a communist even though Jesus Christ predates that shit by hundreds of years. 

The truth is, that communism in its purest form would work. The problem is, it would take someone like Jesus Christ to administer it, and the only way he would administer it is if everyone were already on equal footing in terms of faith and the ability and means to contribute. 

Now, I am faithful, and I have the ability and means to contribute. You say you're a contributor but you're also peddling Marxism, so nobody really knows what in the f*ck you are. 

What we do know is that there is no way in hell that PURE communism would work if just human beings were running it, because they're too self-serving and greedy. It would be hell on earth if people like that came into power and tried to administer communism, or Marxism or whatever the hell you want to call it, which is why I trash ANYONE who disparages the US and its constitution. 

Now, you fill in the blanks; tell me what I'm missing. 

 

 

 

Edited October 7, 2024 by Deluge

[impartialobserver]

First, Marx's theory was that the communist form of life would happen inevitably. Not due to the iron fist of government. Lenin knew this and even admitted that he was trying to fast forward the process. 

What would drive this inevitable but gradual conversion from capitalism to communism? Labor being exploited and rising up.. in short. However, Marx completely ignored technology (machines, electricity, duplicative processes) and therefore hence his labor theory of value was debunked very early on. It is the philosophical underpinning to everything in Das Kapital. 

The labor theory of value (LTV) is a theory that the value of a good or service is determined by the amount of labor required to produce it. Karl Marx used the LTV to critique capitalism and argue that workers are exploited by capitalists

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

And you failed the quiz 

 

7 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

First, Marx's theory was that the communist form of life would happen inevitably. Not due to the iron fist of government. Lenin knew this and even admitted that he was trying to fast forward the process. 

What would drive this inevitable but gradual conversion from capitalism to communism? Labor being exploited and rising up.. in short. However, Marx completely ignored technology (machines, electricity, duplicative processes) and therefore hence his labor theory of value was debunked very early on. It is the philosophical underpinning to everything in Das Kapital. 

The labor theory of value (LTV) is a theory that the value of a good or service is determined by the amount of labor required to produce it. Karl Marx used the LTV to critique capitalism and argue that workers are exploited by capitalists

What Marx failed (or refused) to understand is that given the right circumstances, people could rise above that of a laborer and become a successful capitalist. 

THIS is what makes America great. 

[WestCanMan]

Who chased @robosmith out of this thread?

😘 You're welcome, mankind.

[impartialobserver]

15 minutes ago, Deluge said:

 

What Marx failed (or refused) to understand is that given the right circumstances, people could rise above that of a laborer and become a successful capitalist. 

THIS is what makes America great. 

not quite. there are three primary factors of production; land, labor, and capital. Capital in this case is not money. it is technology, machines, process. The intermediary between labor and the end product. Marx, focused solely on Western Europe (UK, France, Netherlands, and Germany). His theory was that labor was the primary and most important factor of production. They would be worked to the point where they no longer sustain themselves. Keep in mind.. most of what Marx wrote was prediction. From there, they (the proletariat) would inevitably rise up against the factory owners. this would happen over and over and over again and eventually we would settle on communal ownership of the factors of production. 

[Deluge]

14 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

not quite. there are three primary factors of production; land, labor, and capital. Capital in this case is not money. it is technology, machines, process. The intermediary between labor and the end product. Marx, focused solely on Western Europe (UK, France, Netherlands, and Germany). His theory was that labor was the primary and most important factor of production. They would be worked to the point where they no longer sustain themselves. Keep in mind.. most of what Marx wrote was prediction. From there, they (the proletariat) would inevitably rise up against the factory owners. this would happen over and over and over again and eventually we would settle on communal ownership of the factors of production. 

Where is this being done now? In which countries is "communal ownership" being practiced? 

[reason10]

On 9/30/2024 at 10:27 PM, robosmith said:

Opinion | The Only Patriotic Choice for President

The New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com › 2024/09/30 › kamala-harris...

 

 

 

 

17 hours ago — The Only Patriotic Choice for President. Listen to Kathleen Kingsbury, the Times Opinion Editor, make the case for Kamala Harris. Sept. 30 ...

 

Harris only 'patriotic choice' in presidential election

The Hill

https://thehill.com › homenews › media › 4906853-ne...

 

 

 

 

12 hours ago — For these reasons, the outlet continued, Harris is “the only patriotic choice for president,” regardless of “any political disagreements voters ...

 

NYT endorses Harris as 'the only choice' for president

Politico

https://www.politico.com › news › 2024/09/30 › new-y...

 

 

 

 

13 hours ago — The New York Times editorial board on Monday endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, calling her “the only patriotic choice for president” ...

 

 

Kamala Harris for President

The New Yorker

https://www.newyorker.com › Magazine › Election 2024

 

 

 

 

2 days ago — The New Yorker's editors on why, although Harris made extraordinary inroads with the electorate, no responsible assessment of the contest ...

And you wonder why everyone thinks you goose steppers are !diots .

 

The TREASON TIMES? Seriously?

 

KKKamala is a traitor. Anyone who votes for her is a traitor as well.

[impartialobserver]

15 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Where is this being done now? In which countries is "communal ownership" being practiced? 

Answer.. none really. Or last not in the way that Marx predicted. Again, it was a prediction. In short, was that there was a current reality and if certain conditions stayed constant.. xyz would happen. However, he 100% discounted the value of technology which makes labor less integral. 

[Deluge]

Just now, impartialobserver said:

Answer.. none really. Or last not in the way that Marx predicted. Again, it was a prediction. In short, was that there was a current reality and if certain conditions stayed constant.. xyz would happen. However, he 100% discounted the value of technology which makes labor less integral. 

What do you think about those who refer to themselves as Marxist? Are they wasting their time? 

[impartialobserver]

20 minutes ago, Deluge said:

What do you think about those who refer to themselves as Marxist? Are they wasting their time? 

Yes. Everything Marx wrote was based on the underpinning that labor was the most important factor and inherently those who own the factories/businesses are inherently exploiting labor. My view is that you choose to work and therefore know what comes with it. If you do not want to be labor (the human that transforms raw inputs into finished outputs) then be self employed. Thousands do it every day. Again, I come at this from the economics standpoint being that I have 2 degrees in it and have read the book for an economics course. 

Edited October 7, 2024 by impartialobserver

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

If you think your previous interjection was an honest attempt at civil conversation, I wish you a warm and fuzzy day as well.

But if you truly want to have a genuine conversation take the time to actually read my posts. I intentionally used the word aggregate as a means to identify the fact I'm aware that it's not as simple as Canada is better, it's a complex issue ( even the term freedom is subjective) with alot of nuisance. 

To me you're original response, negated the nuisances I included and seemed more like an attempt to score some meaningless point, if mistaken I sincerely apologize and look forward to a fruitful conversation, but the "shitty little pricks" comment makes me doubt that is your objective, as I don't believe my "google it" comment necessitated such language.

Balls in your court sir.

OK... your pemise is we have more freedom in Canada. Lets discuss Canadian freedom. Lets compare it to US state of affairs and European...so we're inclusive...and before we do, as my name here suggests, I am a Nationalist and I love Canada. I do however...lament for Canada...as I do for the entire Western World.

We know that property ownership does not really exist in Canada. In the US you can shoot someone dead if they threaten you or your property. 

Which brings about the question of self defense and...guns. I think we can all agree the Americans have much more freedom with respect to guns and self defense.

What freedoms do you think Canada has that the US does not?

Edited October 7, 2024 by Nationalist

[SkyHigh]

6 hours ago, Deluge said:

I see. 

So you're just an educated guy who's offended by my understanding of Marxism. 

How Marxist of you to notice.  

You know, it's been said that Jesus Christ was a communist even though Jesus Christ predates that shit by hundreds of years. 

The truth is, that communism in its purest form would work. The problem is, it would take someone like Jesus Christ to administer it, and the only way he would administer it is if everyone were already on equal footing in terms of faith and the ability and means to contribute. 

Now, I am faithful, and I have the ability and means to contribute. You say you're a contributor but you're also peddling Marxism, so nobody really knows what in the f*ck you are. 

What we do know is that there is no way in hell that PURE communism would work if just human beings were running it, because they're too self-serving and greedy. It would be hell on earth if people like that came into power and tried to administer communism, or Marxism or whatever the hell you want to call it, which is why I trash ANYONE who disparages the US and its constitution. 

Now, you fill in the blanks; tell me what I'm missing. 

 

 

 

You know what's sad ? I agree with almost everything you just said.

The problem is and always has been with you, is you have too add in crap like I'm "peddling Marxism , instead of just having a conversation where we could exchange ideas even disagree strongly with eachother but at the same time possibly grow in our understanding of certain issues so if you do want to have a conversation, how about not calling me offensive things like pervert or Démocrate 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, SkyHigh said:

You know what's sad ? I agree with almost everything you just said.

The problem is and always has been with you, is you have too add in crap like I'm "peddling Marxism , instead of just having a conversation where we could exchange ideas even disagree strongly with eachother but at the same time possibly grow in our understanding of certain issues so if you do want to have a conversation, how about not calling me offensive things like pervert or Démocrate 

Then why don't you lead by example. Shall we review some of  Your posts for that kind of crap?

Why don't you just actually address his points, ignore the bullshit holier-than-tho crap and lead by example. 

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, Deluge said:

 

What Marx failed (or refused) to understand is that given the right circumstances, people could rise above that of a laborer and become a successful capitalist. 

THIS is what makes America great. 

At the end of the day capitalism killed the whole "Inevitable revolution' concept. 

And now it's not even palatable as an idea. 

Which is why we see the modern version of marxism flow along different lines. We should rise up and revolt because racism and inequality for example. Generally speaking it's the same concept - tear the country down to stop the injustice and build a more fair society. 

In the end tho any model that once again puts people under the thumb of a group of 'administrators' who will tell them what to do and how much to earn etc is doomed to failure.