"My Son the Communist"

[umadcuzimstylin]

I dont think he understands communism.

[BenZowman]

You didn't learn about communism in high-school?

Looking back I don't recall ever actually learning communist theory in high school. We certainly never had to read Marx or Kropotkin or anything.

[wjs010]

But the people with the most money in the US aren't working long hours at a risky highly specialized job.

(remainder not shown here is comprised of retirement, business, and other income)

But what did it take to get to that point? When you say not working hard, you're only referring to manual labor right? It takes ass busting to make a lot of money... You can spin it anyway you want but you have to work hard to get rich. Unless you inherit it. I am zero % mad over inheritance too it's their money and I'm not entitled to a penny... Whereas commies would argue the heirloom should be taxes at 90%. Lol rediculous. Get the phuck off your ass and make your own way. My father grew up dirt poor in the dumbest state in the us. He worked his nuts off an is now one of the most respected defense attorneys in the state all because he didn't ask for a single handout, and he paved the way for his own fortune. People who think they can sit around waiting for someone else's hard earned wealth can phuck themselves .. I'm not addressing this entire message to you ben zoeman... Only the first part lol

[r0gue6]

But what did it take to get to that point? When you say not working hard, you're only referring to manual labor right? It takes ass busting to make a lot of money... You can spin it anyway you want but you have to work hard to get rich. Unless you inherit it. I am zero % mad over inheritance too it's their money and I'm not entitled to a penny... Whereas commies would argue the heirloom should be taxes at 90%. Lol rediculous. Get the phuck off your ass and make your own way. My father grew up dirt poor in the dumbest state in the us. He worked his nuts off an is now one of the most respected defense attorneys in the state all because he didn't ask for a single handout, and he paved the way for his own fortune. People who think they can sit around waiting for someone else's hard earned wealth can phuck themselves .. I'm not addressing this entire message to you ben zoeman... Only the first part lol

Whose money is it?

If you are dead, it's no ones money, which is why rich people created trusts in the USA.

[wjs010]

Whose money is it?

If you are dead, it's no ones money, which is why rich people created trusts in the USA.

So would you be against a progressive healthcare system in which it was treated like food stamps. When a person dies, all of their healthcare credit carries over to their loved one(s). If you are not against this, this you contradict yourself. And don't tell me running healthcare like food stamps is a bad idea, because I'm on a phone and cannot source you the proof. A very bright neurosurgeon came up with the idea, and he just happens to be black and conservative. I think sourcing you that would really rustle your libtard jimmies.

Who's money is it? Whoever the dead person intended it for ... That's whose it is. Brb my father died and I am supposed to inherit $500,000 but I can't because a leechy ******* , rogue 6 is butthurt about it. Go earn your own dime, commie.

[r0gue6]

So would you be against a progressive healthcare system in which it was treated like food stamps. When a person dies, all of their healthcare credit carries over to their loved one(s). If you are not against this, this you contradict yourself. And don't tell me running healthcare like food stamps is a bad idea, because I'm on a phone and cannot source you the proof. A very bright neurosurgeon came up with the idea, and he just happens to be black and conservative. I think sourcing you that would really rustle your libtard jimmies.

Who's money is it? Whoever the dead person intended it for ... That's whose it is. Brb my father died and I am supposed to inherit $500,000 but I can't because a leechy ******* , rogue 6 is butthurt about it. Go earn your own dime, commie.

Dead people don't have rights.

I'm sorry you can't understand this...nor can you understand why aristocracy is bad for a country.

Also, I am earning my own dime...every day, unlike Romney or Bush, who were born aristocrats.

I also love that you can tell me to earn my own dime, but Paris Hilton shouldn't have to earn her own dime.

[BEATINGU]

Whose money is it?

If you are dead, it's no ones money, which is why rich people created trusts in the USA.

It's money that belongs to their family and loved ones. People that they care about; People that they know; People who they want to see benefit from the fruits of their labor.

Not you--People should have the choice to pick where money will go at the event of their death. That money shouldn't be taken and redistributed by government at an exorbitantly high rate.

[r0gue6]

It's money that belongs to their family and loved ones. People that they care about; People that they know; People who they want to see benefit from the fruits of their labor.

Not you--People should have the choice to pick where money will go at the event of their death. That money shouldn't be taken and redistributed by government at an exorbitantly high rate.

People do have the choice where the money goes before they die.

Most choose not to actually exercise that right though...thankfully they created trusts and other mediums to continue their aristocratic ways.

[BEATINGU]

People do have the choice where the money goes before they die.

Most choose not to actually exercise that right though...thankfully they created trusts and other mediums to continue their aristocratic ways.

Stop with your "aristocrat" scare tactics. Just because some families have more money that allows them to afford nicer cars, bigger houses, and the ability to pay for their children's college doesn't make them aristocrats. Some people will always be born with more while others born with less. Instead of being a jealous idiot, who wants to take more from others, and redistribute it among the masses, why don't you just worry about yourself. Just because someone else has more money than you doesn't mean that your ability to succeed is impeded on. You still have the opportunity to better yourself; Study hard, work hard, do the right thing, and you'll be surprised with how much you can accomplish. Jealously is a vice--don't forget that.

[BenZowman]

But what did it take to get to that point? When you say not working hard, you're only referring to manual labor right? It takes ass busting to make a lot of money... You can spin it anyway you want but you have to work hard to get rich. Unless you inherit it. I am zero % mad over inheritance too it's their money and I'm not entitled to a penny... Whereas commies would argue the heirloom should be taxes at 90%. Lol rediculous. Get the phuck off your ass and make your own way. My father grew up dirt poor in the dumbest state in the us. He worked his nuts off an is now one of the most respected defense attorneys in the state all because he didn't ask for a single handout, and he paved the way for his own fortune. People who think they can sit around waiting for someone else's hard earned wealth can phuck themselves .. I'm not addressing this entire message to you ben zoeman... Only the first part lol

I'm referring to any sort of labor.

[wjs010]

Dead people don't have rights.

I'm sorry you can't understand this...nor can you understand why aristocracy is bad for a country.

Also, I am earning my own dime...every day, unlike Romney or Bush, who were born aristocrats.

I also love that you can tell me to earn my own dime, but Paris Hilton shouldn't have to earn her own dime.

Yes yes... Let the butthurt flow through you

I know it sucks doesn't it? The thought of a stupid ass bish gets to come into this world and never worry about money... I know It sucks, but doesn't give any rights for a bureaucratic hand to get involved... It's a free country and nobody should be entitled to anyone's property. Besides, she may inherit money but is she better off as a person? Not really because she's a dumb phuck.

Most of the founding fathers were aristocrats.... Not sure why having lots of money is evil. You wanna level the playing field, rogue? Yes or no? If yes, then you are admitting you feel entitled to property that you didn't earn.

[ProLibertas]

One thing I don't get, and this is no rant at you, but why is communism looked at like a no true scotsman case, but libertopians and anarchists aren't? There have been plenty of minimal government situations, During the time of the robber barons and all there was an extreme lack of regulation on business. It was a time of great profit, and people were making lots of money, but the poor remained abysmally poor and very few had any sense of social mobility. However its not a no true scotsman and the only answer is even less regulation.

Same with anarchy. You cannot set up an anarchic system, because there is no system(to paraphrase stizzle prolly around a year ago), so any time a government collapses we see anarchy, yet somehow its not a no true scotsman. I admit this is sort of the case because the removal of government was not the intent but a byproduct of the system collapsing, but these are still means of viewing the failure of the small government model, yet we are to assume small government will succeed just given a little less government, where as communism will fail because socialist bureaucracies failed whilst calling themselves communist.

Either none of the three work, or none of the three has ever been legitimately approached and all are just theoretical concepts for a more ideal society.

When governments collapse new governments are usually set up almost instantly after, if you want examples where there was no governments and no desire to create one there are examples of this through history.

No government is pretty simple, all you're doing is removing a large gangs monoploy on some economic sectors and letting people keep more of their stuff.

Why don't look up some stuff like life expectency, you'll notice it skyrockets around the time you're talking about, the poor were getting richer faster than any other time period in prior human history.

[r0gue6]

Yes yes... Let the butthurt flow through you

I know it sucks doesn't it? The thought of a stupid ass bish gets to come into this world and never worry about money... I know It sucks, but doesn't give any rights for a bureaucratic hand to get involved... It's a free country and nobody should be entitled to anyone's property. Besides, she may inherit money but is she better off as a person? Not really because she's a dumb phuck.

Most of the founding fathers were aristocrats.... Not sure why having lots of money is evil. You wanna level the playing field, rogue? Yes or no? If yes, then you are admitting you feel entitled to property that you didn't earn.

Nope, it doesn't suck at all...there were much smarter men than me that created the inheritance taxes...and lesser men then subverted them through the tax code.

Hell, this could even get tangential to Corporations in general, and how they are a perverted creation, never meant to hold the power they do now.

[wjs010]

Nope, it doesn't suck at all...there were much smarter men than me that created the inheritance taxes...and lesser men then subverted them through the tax code.

Hell, this could even get tangential to Corporations in general, and how they are a perverted creation, never meant to hold the power they do now.

Dammit now I'm butthurt because you didn't answer yes or no . Lol.

I'm not sure how I feel about corps. I think it would go against my libertarian ideals to be against them, but I can see where they can have too much power

[Boxman]

"My stepson is 16. He posted on his FB that he is now a communist. He is just doing it because he knows it pisses me off. I acted like I didn't care and posted the following (below). Then I changed his password. He had no idea I knew his password. It is still there for all his friends to see. He is really pissed off. I took the door off his bedroom. He has no privacy now.

I took all his video games and stuff and set them up in the sun room for his 8 year old sister to use. Instead of giving him his weekly allowance, I split it up between him and his sisters. Then I took him down to Lucky's supermarket and made him apply for a job. They hired him the next day. But I told him he has to bring home his paycheck every Thursday so I can split it up amongst everybody. He is not very happy. His mother is backing me up 100%. His work load is almost unbearable for a 16 year old.

com·mu·nism (kmy-nzm) - NOUN: A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

... Garrett, since you into communism-I will support you. To keep things at home in the spirit of things, all of your possessions are now shared with your sisters. You will now have to share in the workload of chores at home. All of them.

Since your mother and I are Capitalists we are exempt. Since you are the only communist at home, you get to do ALL the chores."

Birth of a super villain.

[Posthardcore]

why don't you just worry about yourself.

Oh America, such a lovely country <3

[kate00]

I dont think he understands communism.

Shocking, a Ron Paul supporter not understanding what they're criticizing.

[stateless]

His parents should be reported to the police for hacking and theft.

[wjs010]

Shocking, a Ron Paul supporter not understanding what they're criticizing.

How much lib could a libtard tard if a libtard could tard lib?

[BenZowman]

I'm referring to any sort of labor.

Sorry I was going out so I didn't elaborate. As an attorney your father's income was likely the result of compensation for his work, like the vast majority of people. I was pointing out that most of the very wealthy's income is not in the form of compensation for their work, it's passive income. If I own 30,000 shares of KO this year I'll make something like $30,600 in dividend payouts. That's $30,600 that I have put 0 hours of labor and as little effort as it takes to buy something into.

[feedmelies]

Sounds like terrible parenting. Watch the kid move to Venezuela and become Chavez' right hand.

Sounds like a typical "libertarian", wanting to force a misguided system on someone else then finding some arbitrary reason to exempt themselves from it.

[feedmelies]

People do have the choice where the money goes before they die.

Most choose not to actually exercise that right though...thankfully they created trusts and other mediums to continue their aristocratic ways.

Most rich people are self-made.

"You cannot redistribute wealth without destroying the incentive to create wealth" - Milton Friedman

The desire to provide for one's family is one of the biggest incentives to acquire wealth. Eliminate that, and you create a society that squanders wealth instead of building it up.

[DanielEver]

Not self destruction, self reliance.

so how excactly endorsing harmful for ecology prosuctions, overthrowin legally elected leaders and waging wars all over the world have to do anything with self reliance?

I'm not enthused by the only criteria of success in a communist country being "how many people have food".

it's not the only criteria, i've just disproved what you've said about starvation using simple facts.

I know that sounds heartless, but for the most part here in America we don't have to worry about that. That's what comes with free society.

it has completely no relation to "free society" of any kind, since in the beginning of the 20th century even miners were fed beans against their will to be available for a hard work and to ensure that the infamous seven kings of USA will still have their capitals saved.

Government doesn't spoonfeed us or whipe our asses after taking a chit...

unless you're talking about corporations, which are completely guaranteed to be saved and given trillions no matter how bad they fail.

We rely on free market, hard work, and fruits of our labor( riskier job, longer hours= more money, and damn well deserved). In the USA you don't hear in the news how successful we are because less people starve and can't find food...

free market doesn't reward its agents according to they labour, but only to class positions they hold, which is, those who do not work use the results of labour made by the working majority

However in a commie chithole, that is the hallmark of progression: people have food. Are you kidding me?

again, i've used the situation with food to illustrate how bad you failed with your claim, nothing more.

Free society always wins brah...

the whole "free society" theory only lead to mass murders and torture chambers around the world, be sure to check a book "The shock doctrine" by Naomi Klein to enjoy some colourful illustrations of "free society" being applied.

also, the whole theory beyond that (which is the marginalism of Austrian school) was completely destroyed in the first two decades of the 20th century.

I know you're butthurt about the reality of it, but you should probably stop backing up completely failed ideology.

i'm not dealing with an ideology, only with the mere logical consequences.

You didn't learn about communism in high-school?

so, which texts by the communist authors have you learned in high school?

I do not have an advanced knowledge of communism but it's pretty hard to discuss it when everyone is using different definitions. Daniel is talking about pure communism, which is a society with no state and with no classes. Everyone else is talking about Marxist-Leninist states like the USSR, which advocates the need for a powerful state, i.e. a communist party, to lead the people towards a pure communist utopia (which apparently isn't very effective).

to make it clear, Lenin was a marxist, which is, he was against the government (which he explained in his book "Government and Revolution"), in no sense he advocated the existence of the state, he only did what was necessary for the revolution to survive under the given conditions.

another famous leader of the October revolution, Leon Trotsky, spent the rest of his life exposing the fails of Stalin's totalitarism and showing how far it got from the actual leninist ideas of social organization.

[DanielEver]

"You cannot redistribute wealth without destroying the incentive to create wealth" - Milton Friedman

comes out of the mouth of the Pinochet's advisor, right.

those who actually create wealth, which are, workers, do not oppose the distribution, also, 2 decades of 90%+ taxes in USA didn't seem to destroy the incentive you're talking about

[GrokTheCube]

Parents are morons.

If they think he doesn't understand their views, they should sit him down and have a discussion, not treat him exactly like stereotypical bourgeois exploiting the worker would. What they're doing to him will justify all of his beliefs to him even more, it's demonstrating in real life terms all the abuses of power communist authors caution against.

[feedmelies]

comes out of the mouth of the Pinochet's advisor, right.

those who actually create wealth, which are, workers, do not oppose the distribution, also, 2 decades of 90%+ taxes in USA didn't seem to destroy the incentive you're talking about

Workers create wealth? Why do they require their employer then?

The US never experienced 90% taxation.

http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/didnt-w...nd-prosperity/

[ttahor]

Workers create wealth? Why do they require their employer then?

The US never experienced 90% taxation.

http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/didnt-w...nd-prosperity/

yes they did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_...y_of_top_rates

[feedmelies]

yes they did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_...y_of_top_rates

Not in reality. Read my source.

[ttahor]

Not in reality. Read my source.

it says people could exploit loopholes to get under 90%, but the tax rate was still 90%.

theres loopholes today that can get you under 35% or whatever it is today, but its still 35%

[DanielEver]

Workers create wealth?

yep, there's a small branch of social thought called "labor theory of value" developed by folks like Smith, Ricardo, Marx etc.

Why do they require their employer then?

because under capitalism the means of production are owned by those who has capital. it's not like they actually require an employer, just they are forced to work for him under given situation.

The US never experienced 90% taxation.

well, the tax rate was more than 90% for 20 years. your disproval is basically some dude saying there were lots of fraud and ways to avoid high taxes.

it still doesn't change the fact that US experienced such rate of taxation, unless you use some non-standard meaning of the verb "to experience"