Socialism Doesn't Work?

How about them?

 

Do they pay their tax?

 

Actually, there are no largely socialist countries either. A socialist country would be one in which the collective owns the majority of the means of production, or all of it; and there's no country in the world where that is the case, because everybody who's tried it has found that it simply doesn't work. What the countries where the government does own and control much or all of the means of production are is tyrannical/dictatorial/oligarchical, not socialist, because government oppression/repression is the only way you'll ever get an entire populace to go along with it.

I really like that you're sticking to your "socialism is the wave of the future" fantasy; but since it's already proven it doesn't work and has already been relegated to the ash-heap of history, what you and your fellow socialists/anarchists (not sure what you want me to call what you are) are going to have to settle for is decreasingly redistributionist nanny state welfare programs.

 

Admit it. You lost this one. LOL

 

I'll admit that the utter lack of substance in your posts is unsurprising.

 

You mad Bro? LOL

 

Do not expect an intelligent response.

Fact is Somalia is a failed socialist state not a failed capitalist state but the fool you are pointing that fact out to only mocks people like an immature brat when faced with facts which ruin his claim.

Which is every claim he makes.

 

You clearly are.

You got spanked again in your uninformed and false assertions about somalia

 

What makes it a failed socialist state? I gotta hear this?

 

Before descending into the state of anarchy which it is in now it was a socialist state little one.

Try reading.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia

 

That is your answer? Oh my god. hahahahaha

 

No the link is and it settles the issue.

Funny how some people laugh when facts and evidence make them into my bitch on a regular basis.

 

You mad Bro? LOL

 

I called that one.
Consistent small minded behavior when spanked with facts.

It's ok sweetpea someday you might get one right

 

From a historic perspective, everything you have stated is accurate. I used to support the Electoral College precisely for the reasons you cited. However, the elections of 2000 and especially 2016, both resulted in the majority of Americans feeling their votes didn't count. When the Electoral College was conceived at least half of all Americans regarded themselves as citizens of their state rather than the entity "United States," reflecting precisely what you describe in your post. However, after the Civil War that perception slowly began to change, and after World War 2, I believe the vast majority of Americans regard themselves as citizens of the U.S. as a whole. While there remains a minority of Americans who still cling to the state's rights perspective, I don't think most of us do. I have lived in eight different states for several years each, and do not regard the state of my birth as my home. Nor do I regard any single state as "more special" in the hierarchy of states by comparison. I like the different states I've lived in for different reasons, but I am a citizen of the U.S. as a whole. ALL the states are my country, even those I've never lived in. I think most Americans share that national identification. The only election affected by the Electoral College is the Presidential election. In today's America, the President is the central leader of all the people wherever they live, and must be regarded as such by every voter as an individual, regardless of the state they live in. Almost three million more Americans voted for Hillary in 2016 than voted for Trump. Having Trump be the President and leader of our nation is like saying those nearly three million votes don't really count. For decades we've lamented over the low voter turnout in our country compared to many other democracies around the world. When you have a system that repeatedly declares the candidate who gets the monority of votes from the citizenry as the winner, how can you be shocked or surprised that voters feel their votes don't count? The Electoral College is outdated, outmoded, unfair, and is causing more stress in the electorate than any other facet of voting. It must be eliminated ASAP to make the U.S. a real democracy and a true UNITED nation.

 

I replied to several of you points in an adjacent post, but wanted to respond to your first thought above. Yes, Parliamentary governments in Europe govern by coalition, which is to say those parties that earn fewer votes actually become part of the new government. However, the Prime Minister is always the leader of the party getting the most votes, and that party has the most power and influence (and votes) within the ruling coalition. The thing I like most about the Parliamentary system is the fact that if any government or Prime Minister becomes too unpopular, an election can be called at any time to give the voters a chance to make changes as they see fit. Parliamentary government is MUCH MORE DEMOCRATIC and responsive to voters than our system is.

 

That's the way it should be. However they cover their profits from taxes and most are above the law. Whatever they do effectively is unpunished. The fines are negligible and the employees fired, and/or arrested are not the ones who gave the orders or received the bonuses.

 

There are some good points. Several counterpoints though.

I think plenty of people still favor their States and I believe the citizens of Maine would object to having the citizens of Alabama doing likewise. Aside from that, our nation is under great social stress and trying to cram every American into one seamless will backfire. Most of the Democratic voters are in small densely populated coastal enclaves, and most of the Republican voters are not.

The reason Clinton lost is not because Trump got more votes. The 2012 and 2016 Republican candidates got basically the same number of votes. However, several million fewer people voted for the Democratic candidate in 2016 than votes in 2012. Perhaps the solution is not to offer such a bad candidate?

Also, the country is just about an oligarchy. A very corrupt oligarchy. Both parties insist on offering bad candidates espousing very similar economic policies that promise more. Tinkering with the Constitution will not change that.

 

You have simular devide in the states themsleves so that hardly matters.

She was a bad candidate but she still got about as much votes (66 million) as obama in 2012 . Trump got around 2 million more votes then romney in 2012 but a mayor difference was that around 7 million votes went third party while in 2012 this was only 2 million.


Trump also got lucky with how his votes were spaced out. It would have only taken around a 100 000 people to change the elections and that sees one of the main cases against the EC.



But the main issue for the EC is that there are not/barely any federal laws on who can vote, how to vote,...

First you would have to take away this from the states , put it federal get some laws that govern who/where/how you can for for the whole country otherwise one state could have vastly different standards how/who can vote yet the results would all be added up.

 

Well, I hope so. But we are going in the wrong direction and circumstances have been such that even I have been compelled to vote 'right'. There are 3 main issues today. The 2 main ones (naturally) are Democracy and Socialism. Representatives of those two have been shirking in their principles. The third issue is immigration and because the 2 main issues have been shelved completely, immigration is the only thing on EVERYONE's mind. As it happens it's only the right that is eager to address this problem. There it is! That's it in a nutshell!

 

BULLSHIT.

Sorry, BULLSHIT again.

 

Are you making this up as you go along or reading it verbatim from a 'shill' check-list? All nations have elements of democracy. Period. But this intro of yours screams of pro-American disinformation because it hints that the US is somehow leading the world. I'll have you know that the US somewhere around 25th. in world ranking Democracies. That's not very good. "Leader of the free world"? In a pig's ass. That's false propaganda, pure and simple.

 

I'm happy bro; that you're the opposition. lol

 

Yet another thoughtful, substance-filled post from the left.

One begins to wonder if there are any lefties on this board actually capable of carrying on an adult conversation?
Anyone?
Bueller?

 

Until you provide reliable evidence for this, it remains your personal opinion.