Muh socialism. As if the collapse of a country can be explained by a single buzzword. Meanwhile, the entire world economy is based on a ponzi scheme.
Muh socialism. As if the collapse of a country can be explained by a single buzzword. Meanwhile, the entire world economy is based on a ponzi scheme.
It's funny how you always tend to make fallacious arguments instead of actually addressing the point while wondering why we don't take them seriously.
- - - Updated - - -
So practically you accused me of selective quoting while I qouted the whole thing, and as a defense you qouted the exact same post ... and here in this post used your own sentence as the source for the definition of socialism ... That's some rich reasoning right there.
I mean it's not as if you said it was in response to me in the same post as this, ...
In 2008 Finland had 24% of their work force in the public sector. Finland has universal healthcare and in the late 1980's had the most advanced welfare system ever created. They weren't actively aiming for socialism like Venezuela but they were ahead of them.
I already mentioned 2006-2009. You're going as far back as WWI says a lot of this claim. For one, the first peoples car the Model T wasn't in production until 1908 and WW1 was 1918. You know how many people owned cars in 1918? Anything before the Model T were cars for wealthy people, and oil shortages don't count for them. Therefore anything in the 1800's is pointless.
And yet unoriginal. When the US puts sanctions on a country they will feel it. That's the kind of power America has.The idea that the US caused a drop in oil prices to hurt Venezuela is still a stupid conspiracy theory.
https://learningenglish.voanews.com/...n/3144704.html
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Price...il-Prices.html
Because they were not aiming for socialism; that's why they are ahead.
It seems that the public sector work force is actually decreasing in Finland.
And to confirm that this idea of driving down the oil price to hurt Venezuela's socialists is in fact a conspiracy theory the article links to global research - a known Canadian conspiracy site: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky
"The Centre for Research on Globalization promotes a variety of conspiracy theories and falsehoods"
If the writers cannot tell good sites from conspiracy sites their conclusions aren't worth much.
Economics 101 is that sanctions against an oil-producer does not reduce oil prices; it would rather decrease supply and thus increase prices.
Last edited by Forogil; 2017-09-18 at 05:29 PM.
While selectively highlighting certain parts, that seemed to confirm your falsehoods. Socialism is both an economical system and politics aimed at that. Your "truth" (i.e. falsehood) is that you claimed it was only the first, and that was some deep fact that few knew.
- - - Updated - - -
The bananas? Don't insult their intelligence by comparing them with the current Venezuelan ruler.
This needs to be sent to Maduro.
I seem to remember it being relevant for Bill Clinton back in the day too. Maybe they can share notes?
If they run out of rabbits they could always start into eating some of the neckbeards posting about them.
Its a proof socialism works, until it fails and then its not real socialism.
True, not a single country is based on the principle of collective ownership of the means of production.
Many of the countries have some fairly large party arguing for socialism - or more often previously argued for it, but there seems to be a trend:
Starting from A:
Australian Labor Party Labor (in opposition).
Australian governments have not attempted the "democratic socialisation" of any industry since the 1940s, when the Chifley government failed to nationalise the private banks, and in fact have privatised several industries such as aviation and banking.
Social Democratic Party of Austria (in ruling coalition). In June 1991, the party congress decided to change its name from the "Socialist Party of Austria" to the "Social Democratic Party of Austria" (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs), thus shifting the emphasis from socialism to a reaffirmation to its commitment to social democracy.
No.
I don't think you know what a socialist country is.
"a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.'
Last time I looked most of the countries OECD where not socialist countries and where more capitalistic.
1. Some/Many people are poor and have a hard time affording food.
2. Government takes control of prices on goods produced by farmers to help those people.
3. Low Prices set by government force farms to shut-down, food supply dwindles.
4. Now everyone is poor and having a hard time affording food.
This is what forced government equality looks like folks, we all hit the lowest common denominator.
americas not going to send them billions in food aide so they don't have to feel bad for destroying their own country and live full lives eating food provided by us while they change nothing about their country or culture to solve their problems?
There is no famine in Venezuela it is a myth, the thing about the toilet paper had to due with an economic cold war within the country.
No, nothing can save Venezuela now.
Last edited by Bryntrollian; 2017-09-19 at 12:43 AM.
Ahead in socialism or ahead financially? Cause Finland has both.
Finland doesn't seek socialism but if we do reach an automated society you don't want private owners to supply food and products. At that point you want socialism to make those businesses public.
OK... So where did you get that info?It seems that the public sector work force is actually decreasing in Finland.
The point of mentioning sanctions was to show what kind of power American can have on a countries economy. One single country can cripple the economy of any other country it wants. It doesn't always have to be sanctions, but yes putting a sanction on a country that produces oil will not reduce prices. But America can fuck with prices if it wants without sanctions..
Economics 101 is that sanctions against an oil-producer does not reduce oil prices; it would rather decrease supply and thus increase prices.