Chris Matthews of MSNBC gets into it with the Chairman of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, about if, and when, Socialist Bernie Sanders will be speaking at the Democrat convention next summer. The exchange between the old school Democrat Chris... and the air-headed Ms. Poodle is hysterical. The reality here is Matthews is in the tank for Clinton and believes she is their only chance to win... and Debbie can't handle anything that takes her off her talking points.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkr7DsQTwno

 

Further evidence that Socialism does not work in the real world. This guy in Seattle turned his entire wage scale into all 120 of his employees getting paid the same $70,000 per year. It took 3 months for his perfect Socialist plan to fall apart. He thought the people making more would be okay with everyone else making as much as they are. He also thought his clients would think of him as a great man of income equality. 3 months later... he's whistling a different tune.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/01/seattle-ceo-who-set-firm-minimum-wage-to-70g-rents-house-to-make-ends-meet/?intcmp=hplnws

You're just getting better and better man

I will chip into the topic title but refrain from the topic OP >_>

 

Democrats follow large pressure-groups, be it religious, economical or otherwise orientated groups.

Socialists try to better the lifes of the less fortunate and rail against any form of non-governmental pressure groups.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC gets into it with the Chairman of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, about if, and when, Socialist Bernie Sanders will be speaking at the Democrat convention next summer. The exchange between the old school Democrat Chris... and the air-headed Ms. Poodle is hysterical. The reality here is Matthews is in the tank for Clinton and believes she is their only chance to win... and Debbie can't handle anything that takes her off her talking points.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkr7DsQTwno

 

Further evidence that Socialism does not work in the real world. This guy in Seattle turned his entire wage scale into all 120 of his employees getting paid the same $70,000 per year. It took 3 months for his perfect Socialist plan to fall apart. He thought the people making more would be okay with everyone else making as much as they are. He also thought his clients would think of him as a great man of income equality. 3 months later... he's whistling a different tune.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/01/seattle-ceo-who-set-firm-minimum-wage-to-70g-rents-house-to-make-ends-meet/?intcmp=hplnws

Democrats are far more conservative than socialists. I mean, there is really very little difference between republicans and democrats in the larger scheme of politics. They are both conservative parties in favor of an over sized government. The actual differences are minimal. Like abortion, legal marijuana or taxes. 

 

Also, capitalism doesn't work in the real world either. The sad reality is that the global system is falling apart because capitalism is effectively a ponzi scheme that just like communism, sounds good on paper but simply does not work in practice the way it is described on paper. Both of these ideas completely ignore the most important factor of economics- that is, the human factor. 

 

Thus, I think debates about right vs left are bit redundant. The fact is, things change and nothing is static. One system will never work indefinitely. Ever.

We all know what the difference is, and if I or any other Republican asked this question, we would get attacked relentlessly and firebombed with every name in the book for bringing up... as they would put it... such a mean spirited comparison. The point is, the Democrat party has been taken over by anti-capitalists, and the party leaders cannot say anything to push against the Progressive, Socialist base or they risk rebellion. Chris Matthews is a solid, MSNBC, Democrat... and Ms. Poodle defaulted to the playbook of not answering the question you are asked... but answering the question you wanted to hear.

 

She doubled down again this morning when asked again by Chuck Todd on Meet the Press, straight up... What's the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist? and she once again refused to answer. There is no longer any difference.

I will chip into the topic title but refrain from the topic OP >_>

 

Democrats follow large pressure-groups, be it religious, economical or otherwise orientated groups.

Socialists try to better the lifes of the less fortunate and rail against any form of non-governmental pressure groups.

I thought it was republicans who tended toward religion. No offense intended if it sounds that way, I vote for Ron Paul haha.

 

I will chip into the topic title but refrain from the topic OP >_>

 

Democrats follow large pressure-groups, be it religious, economical or otherwise orientated groups.

Socialists try to better the lifes of the less fortunate and rail against any form of non-governmental pressure groups.

I thought it was republicans who tended toward religion. No offense intended if it sounds that way, I vote for Ron Paul haha.

 

American Democrats are different than non-American democrats.

(Pretty sure Betsy is from Europe).

ohhhh, haha that makes more sense then, shoulda checked Betsy's profile before answering

how did you emoticon? mine didn't show.

Christians tend to believe abortion is murder... so they support the pro-life platform of Republicans. Progressives tend to believe life begins when the parents decide they want the baby to live... so they support the pro-choice platform of Democrats. I am what is called a fiscal conservative, so this issue is low on my list of importance. I support parents making a conscience decision to abort a pregnancy during the first 3 months and paying for it themselves. That is as far as I will go on abortion. This issue is why people strong of faith, will be Republican.

 

Ron Paul will no longer run. Rand has taken up the banner and popular with Libertarians.

Edited August 4, 201511 yr by Lysistrata

ohhhh, haha that makes more sense then, shoulda checked Betsy's profile before answering

how did you emoticon? mine didn't show.

Not sure why emoticons wouldn't work for you? Are you using a PC? If so, there should be a little smiley in the toolbox that brings up emoticons, but even then it should work just by typing the symbols. Like : + P =

I know, and I will be abstaining from voting in 2016 because of that. Unless Trump really makes the ticket somehow, then I'll be voting against him most likely. I don't see that happening though after his rant the other day. How can that fool think we wouldn't be talking about immigration without him when that has been an issue for decades? I was watching the news with my grandma, I think Fox, and they actually agreed with him that they wouldn't be talking about immigration without him. smh

 

 

ohhhh, haha that makes more sense then, shoulda checked Betsy's profile before answering

how did you emoticon? mine didn't show.

 

 

Not sure why emoticons wouldn't work for you? Are you using a PC? If so, there should be a little smiley in the toolbox that brings up emoticons, but even then it should work just by typing the symbols. Like : + P =

That must be the problem then, I'm on an iPad and tried using an emoji. I moved in with my grandparents last month to take care of my grandpa who had a series of strokes and there is no room for my computer so it's just sitting in a closet.

I'm with FF that there's little appreciable difference between or sense in the modern parties. Both pay lip service to their extremes and then whip back to the middle for the election. This is largely due to the first-past-the-post voting system and the archaic electorate system that doesn't even relate to its actual use today. There's a reason the founding fathers wanted the original senators to be chosen by the state LEGISLATURES rather than the people. They were supposed to balance the chaotic sway of public opinion.

 

As for the topic title, pure socialists believe that people work the same no matter what stimulus you give them, or that they work better with negative stimulus rather than positive stimulus. There's a lot of jobs that just plain wouldn't get done if people weren't paid better to do them. The only people that want pure socialism are the ones that don't want to sacrifice for their own future.

 

Sorry I didn't watch the interview. I really don't care about the DNC or news anchor bobble heads. Those shows are an anachronism when much better info is on the web. Most mainstream news programs don't even bother fact-checking anymore, At least I can fact-check for myself on the web rather than listening to hot air or filler stories.

 

Socialism works in economic spaces when public resources are not taken into account or private ownership is not possible. Fishing is a prime example of an industry that requires government controls to keep companies from cheating humanity into culinary poverty because of their own self-interest. I hunt and happily abide by the laws and regulations for wildlife because it is a public resource that should be passed down and enjoyed for generations to come. Air pollution, water pollution, and transportation are all places where there just isn't enough stimulus (or too much risk) for private companies to function well.

 

Regulated capitalism works in those parts of the economy where most private decision-making is beneficial to both companies and society as a whole. Government offers some services that companies shouldn't themselves (like enforcing contracts or worker treatment) or provides the necessary motivation for companies to act in society's best interest.

 

Pure capitalism has never existed, except possibly in the drug trade or other black markets. Even those rely on government currency rather than barter, although those actors enforce their own contracts in their own special way. It's possible that North Korea is actually a capitalistic actor if you consider the entire country an independent company that disregards all international laws. I don't think anybody wants companies treating their workers like North Korea treats its citizens. And trust me, companies will do anything to make money if there's nothing that stops them. Never underestimate a the corporate citizen's disregard for common human decency. The Stanford Prison Experiment proved a long time ago that people will do immoral things for what they consider the group good, whether as prison guards or executives. Too many people forget that modern labor and safety laws were won by workers standing against Pinkerton guns hired by management. You would still have children losing arms in threshing machines today if it were not for those workers.

 

A class environment is necessary to motivate the clever to work themselves up and the rich to maintain their status. If someone doesn't value their status, that's a perfectly sane way to live, but they should recognize that society is better off if innovators have a reward for their work. I think Northern European countries do it best by allowing the status differences, but making things more a little more even once you get past the stupid money level or if you're in the dirt poor level.

 

 

except possibly in the drug trade or other black markets.

 

 

Finally, someone who agrees with me on that.

 

 

There's a reason the founding fathers wanted the original senators to be chosen by the state LEGISLATURES rather than the people. They were supposed to balance the chaotic sway of public opinion.

 

Finally, someone who agrees with me on that. 

Well said Duderonomy

 

 

I will chip into the topic title but refrain from the topic OP >_>

 

Democrats follow large pressure-groups, be it religious, economical or otherwise orientated groups.

Socialists try to better the lifes of the less fortunate and rail against any form of non-governmental pressure groups.

I thought it was republicans who tended toward religion. No offense intended if it sounds that way, I vote for Ron Paul haha.

 

American Democrats are different than non-American democrats.

(Pretty sure Betsy is from Europe).

 

 Indeed, if Lys went for the Democrat/Republican difference I would have answered differently, but the topic title didn't specify so I went for the "world-view".

 

ohhhh, haha that makes more sense then, shoulda checked Betsy's profile before answering

how did you emoticon? mine didn't show.

Pfft, like you know where this magical land named "Belgium" is

 

ohhhh, haha that makes more sense then, shoulda checked Betsy's profile before answering

how did you emoticon? mine didn't show.

Pfft, like you know where this magical land named "Belgium" is

 

Isn't that next to Rivendell or something? How's it been since the elves moved out?

warmer, those fools never believed in properly insulation.

People should realize that there isn't left and right wing politics anymore and that a politician or group's policies cannot be classified as one thing, it's just not possible.

People should realize that there isn't left and right wing politics anymore and that a politician or group's policies cannot be classified as one thing, it's just not possible.

I'm trying really hard to find something meaningful in this comment. My only guess is that you wish people would just not care about the issues anymore... talk them into believing there's no difference. I don't get involved in South African politics. I don't live there and it has no effect on me. So I really don't know what conditions you have there. But I assure you we have left and right politics here. The massive abuse of power that Obama has been orchestrating would have resulted in impeachment for any past President, no matter which party involved. But no, we can't impeach Obama... that would be racist. There are a lot of really stupid people. We will just have to sit on our hands and try to clean up the mess when he leaves office. Hopefully it's not too late.

Wow... I didn't know I would be bringing this thread up again, but Chris Matthews once again asked the question, this time to to the bobble head herself. Watch how she dodges and refuses to answer the question, and then in a classic Clinton move, deflects the question on Bernie Sanders, who is of course not there to defend himself. Why does she bob her head when people are talking? It's... condescending,  and so irritating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26AXB8trgJU