[GrandpaGreer]

OK. I have to ask up front here, because I am getting the impression that you may not have had the same experiences in life or the same exposure to things or the same basic education as I have had. Are you not an American? Do you live in another country? Canada or England, maybe? Do you not understand our Constitution?

I'm Canadian, it's no secret, and while I'm not a constitutional lawyer, I understand the american constitution better than some americans do.

Yes, I'm educated. Compared to some, I'm even 'highly educated'. But I don't like to be a d*** about it, so I'll just say that I'm educated enough to understand a word as simple as 'socialism', anyway.

... our Constitution provides for the protection of our country. It also provides for the infrastructure to implement that along with the delivery of mail. That is it for the Federal government from your list.

The Constitution pays the salaries of soldiers, policemen, firemen...? No, the taxpayer does. The constitution allows the federal government to socialize the cost of these programs, by levying taxes, and that is socialism, whether you recognise it or not.

By the way, I love Canada! I visit frequently on business and have some very close friends there...their kids call me Grandpa and I count them among my other grandchildren. I am on my way there this afternoon, as a matter of fact. Flying into Pearson in Toronto.

Never said the Constitution pays anything...not sure how you got that, but it doesn't matter. Of course taxes pay for it...federally for the military and locally for the fire, police, etc., but just because you were able to work the word "socialize" into your explanation, doesn't make it "socialism". If I like to commune with nature or with another person, am I a communist?

Just because you have to tax the people to pay for something, doesn't automatically make it socialism. The military as a program is not socialism. Basic safety and local infrastructure like police, fire, emergency medical protection that is established by citizens of a community and paid for by locally collected taxes is not socialism, either (to me, they seem more like insurance that the community agrees to establish and maintain by themselves).

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members."

[WTFO]

So if it was up to you, you'd get rid of the police, the fire department, the army, the air force, the navy, the marines, interstate highways, social security, etc...?

Only a complete idiot tries to claim that the military, police and fire dept are contained in socialism. Oh wait, didn't recognize the new picture. That proves the statement was from an idiot. A Canadian troll idiot to be exact.

For those who don't understand what socialism is, here's the definition:

"1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. 2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property. 2b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods nad pay according to work done."

Clearly, socialism is about economics and the ownership/control of production. The military, police and fire dept are not designed to have any influence on the economy. They are the organizations who carry out the govt's legitimate role in the nation, to protect the people and their freedoms.

This time our troll used the logic fallacy of:

argumentum ad ignorantiam: A misleading argument used in reliance on people's ignorance.

He's hoping that nobody understands the true meaning of socialism and can destroy his paper-thin position. However, it appears that he is the only person who is ignorant of what socialism means.

[arnnatz]

But, wait WTFO, CrackyHead is brilliant by his own admission:

Yes, I'm educated. Compared to some, I'm even 'highly educated'. But I don't like to be a d*** about it, so I'll just say that I'm educated enough to understand a word as simple as 'socialism', anyway.

Oops, he fucked up the definition of socialism all thru this thread. My bad.

[crankyhead]

Just because you have to tax the people to pay for something, doesn't automatically make it socialism. The military as a program is not socialism. Basic safety and local infrastructure like police, fire, emergency medical protection that is established by citizens of a community and paid for by locally collected taxes is not socialism, either (to me, they seem more like insurance that the community agrees to establish and maintain by themselves).

There is no better business model, than insurance, to describe socialism. You pay a small premium into a pool of money, with a large group of other people, so that if the time comes when youneed a large sum of money, to cover medical expenses, property damage, etc... the money is there, at your disposal. You don't have to borrow it, you don't have to pay it back. Everyone helps each other through their own personal 'hard times'. This is cooperation. This is socialism.

[crankyhead]

"1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. 2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property. 2b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods nad pay according to work done."

Clearly, socialism is about economics and the ownership/control of production. The military, police and fire dept are not designed to have any influence on the economy. They are the organizations who carry out the govt's legitimate role in the nation, to protect the people and their freedoms.

The military in the US is purely voluntary. It is funded by government levied taxes. It's commander in chief, is a democratically elected civilian. What's the US military motto? Army of one. Why not just call it 'The Collective'? Once in the military, every soldier adheres to the maxim: No one gets left behind. Every volunteer gets housing, clothinng, healthcare, pensions... how much more socialist can it be?

To reference the definition you provided WTFO, are you suggesting that the military isn't under governmental ownership and administration? You're suggesting that the military is privatized?

[crankyhead]

Oops, he fucked up the definition of socialism all thru this thread. My bad.

In fact, the opposite.

[WTFO]

"1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. 2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property. 2b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods nad pay according to work done."

Clearly, socialism is about economics and the ownership/control of production. The military, police and fire dept are not designed to have any influence on the economy. They are the organizations who carry out the govt's legitimate role in the nation, to protect the people and their freedoms.

The military in the US is purely voluntary. It is funded by government levied taxes. It's commander in chief, is a democratically elected civilian. What's the US military motto? Army of one. Why not just call it 'The Collective'? Once in the military, every soldier adheres to the maxim: No one gets left behind. Every volunteer gets housing, clothinng, healthcare, pensions... how much more socialist can it be?

To reference the definition you provided WTFO, are you suggesting that the military isn't under governmental ownership and administration? You're suggesting that the military is privatized?

Again, you show what a complete idiot you really are. You completely ignored the key fact I put forward (because it clearly destroys your belief system). Socialism is an economic theory. It relates to the production and distribution of goods and who owns it.

I find it extremely funny that some Canadian troll is trying to lecture me on what the military is or is not after I've been serving in it for close to 20 years. Keep using your logic fallacies, because the facts would destroy your liberal dogma.

Your ignorance is only matched by your arrogance. AGAIN and AGAIN

[WTFO]

Just because you have to tax the people to pay for something, doesn't automatically make it socialism. The military as a program is not socialism. Basic safety and local infrastructure like police, fire, emergency medical protection that is established by citizens of a community and paid for by locally collected taxes is not socialism, either (to me, they seem more like insurance that the community agrees to establish and maintain by themselves).

There is no better business model, than insurance, to describe socialism. You pay a small premium into a pool of money, with a large group of other people, so that if the time comes when youneed a large sum of money, to cover medical expenses, property damage, etc... the money is there, at your disposal. You don't have to borrow it, you don't have to pay it back. Everyone helps each other through their own personal 'hard times'. This is cooperation. This is socialism.

Actually, there are better models to describe socialism:
Soviet Russia
North Korea
Cuba
Vietnam
Nazi Germany
Mussolini's Italy
China (especially under Mao)

These are just a few places where Marxism and socialism ruled the day. The result: ecomonic failure for the "people", misery for the "collective", and millions dead for the "greater good for all".

As for business models:
The US postal service (failing while UPS and FexEx succeed)
Amtrak (money pit for US tax dollars)
The US Dept of Education (failing to ensure graduates can even read or have a basic understanding of capitalism, hence the OWS idiots)
The DMV (enough said)

You make a false comparison to insurance companies who exist to make a profit (not for the people's "cooperation"). They issue insurance based on risk. If you're a higher risk you pay more or don't get coverage. It amazes me how warped your brain is. You clearly don't understand anything at all. You claim to be "educated"? Wow, please tell me the schools you went to so I make sure my kids can avoid becoming such a retard.