New York City

[accelafine]

It's funny how you call a reasoned and historically accurate description of Socialism "kneejerk."

Socialism has a 100% record of failure, and a disastrous record of hundreds of millions of abused, plundered, tortured, exiled and murdered. NOTHING has a worse record, in all of human history. And that's what you want?


Tell that to the Dems...and their friends at Blackrock, Amazon, etc. They don't seem to have gotten that message from you.


There are just no serious discussions of fixing the climate that do not begin with the words, "China and India." If China and India don't fix their situations, nothing anybody else does will matter a fig. That's reality.

Well you've been enjoying the fruits of a so-called 'socialist' country your whole life apparently.

Not at all. My country has never been Socialist. The most you could say is that it's been broadly a "capitalist" country with a few social programs that are bankrupting it; but you couldn't ever call it Socialist, because Socialism has never been in control of the means of production, which is its fundamental goal, if you know the theory.

Socialist countries, historically, have LOW standards of living, and a high rate of death. And they don't just "tax," but actively attack the whole concept of private property as well.

[Walker]

Here’s the Democratic Socialists of America’s demands to Zohran Mamdani for how to lead an Israel-hating NYC
https://nypost.com/2025/11/08/us-news/h ... hating-nyc

“Well at least the DSA mask is off,” said state Assemblyman Kalman Yeger, a conservative Brooklyn Democrat and Orthodox Jew. “This was never about affordability, free buses or anything else. This was always about Jew hatred.

[Walker]

Consider, 'tis you who be guilty of wrong topicking, at this time and place in the history of the aging world.

[Walker]

(continued)

This checklist for front man Zohran, the new mayor of New York, will make for a busy morning.
Just skip the red tape, declare an emergency (the children are starving), and assert emergency powers.
All the necessary documents should be in a row on his first day on the job, to start with the legal signatures.
Get 'er done and let the lawyers fight for a few years until it's a done deal, which was the Democrat's tactic used for opening the border. Why give up the winning formula?


https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/s ... &strip=all

[Age]

The knee jerk opposition to socialism is noteworthy.

It's funny how you call a reasoned and historically accurate description of Socialism "kneejerk."

Socialism has a 100% record of failure, and a disastrous record of hundreds of millions of abused, plundered, tortured, exiled and murdered. NOTHING has a worse record, in all of human history. And that's what you want?

Notice and see how "immanuel can" will twist things around and 'try to' manipulate the readers into believing some thing that was never even said nor meant, was what was meant.

I don't see the myopic views of corporations driven by near term profit saving the world from anything.

Tell that to the Dems...and their friends at Blackrock, Amazon, etc. They don't seem to have gotten that message from you.

LOL Why only has "one-side", of a two party agreed upon capitalist system, supposedly aligned "themselves" with profit driven companies, here?

Is it not obvious to absolutely every one, here, that profit driven companies are what is wanted by so-called "both sides"?

Profit is driving us toward environmental destruction.

There are just no serious discussions of fixing the climate that do not begin with the words, "China and India." If China and India don't fix their situations, nothing anybody else does will matter a fig.

And, once again, since "adam" blamed "eve" for his own Wrong doing, "men" like "immanuel can" will 'try to' justify and/or blame someone else for their own Wrong doing.

LOL "immanuel can", here, is 'trying to' argue and fight that it is perfectly fine and okay that if others continue to do wrong, then so to can "immanuel can".

That's reality.

That may well be your own personal reality "immanuel can", but it certainly is not Reality, Itself.

you adult human beings who seek monetary gains and profits are obviously driving the destruction of the actual environment, which 'you', and future, human beings actually need for your continued survival.

And, there is not a single thing that you could say that could refute this irrefutable Fact. Now, that is Reality, "immanuel can".

[Age]

Consider, 'tis you who be guilty of wrong topicking, at this time and place in the history of the aging world.

Once more, 'this' does not relate to what I have actually said, and meant.

[Gary Childress]

It's funny how you call a reasoned and historically accurate description of Socialism "kneejerk."

Socialism has a 100% record of failure, and a disastrous record of hundreds of millions of abused, plundered, tortured, exiled and murdered. NOTHING has a worse record, in all of human history. And that's what you want?


Tell that to the Dems...and their friends at Blackrock, Amazon, etc. They don't seem to have gotten that message from you.


There are just no serious discussions of fixing the climate that do not begin with the words, "China and India." If China and India don't fix their situations, nothing anybody else does will matter a fig. That's reality.

Well you've been enjoying the fruits of a so-called 'socialist' country your whole life apparently.

Not at all. My country has never been Socialist. The most you could say is that it's been broadly a "capitalist" country with a few social programs that are bankrupting it; but you couldn't ever call it Socialist, because Socialism has never been in control of the means of production, which is its fundamental goal, if you know the theory.

Socialist countries, historically, have LOW standards of living, and a high rate of death. And they don't just "tax," but actively attack the whole concept of private property as well.

So the social programs are "bankrupting" the country? If they took away the social programs and let the poor just die on the roadsides, would that be preferable?

[Age]

Well you've been enjoying the fruits of a so-called 'socialist' country your whole life apparently.

Not at all. My country has never been Socialist. The most you could say is that it's been broadly a "capitalist" country with a few social programs that are bankrupting it; but you couldn't ever call it Socialist, because Socialism has never been in control of the means of production, which is its fundamental goal, if you know the theory.

Socialist countries, historically, have LOW standards of living, and a high rate of death. And they don't just "tax," but actively attack the whole concept of private property as well.

So the social programs are "bankrupting" the country?

If you are asking a question, here, and not just telling, then social programs do not bankrupt any countries.

What bankrupts is mismanagement.

And, how the people of any country can mismanage to a point of bankruptcy, (when money is just given to them, before services are provided, and when money is just being 'printed' or 'added on' whenever they like), goes to show and reveal just how corrupt those who are meant to 'manage the money' are, exactly.

If they took away the social programs and let the poor just die on the roadsides, would that be preferable?

To some, like "immanuel can", then this is an obvious, 'Yes'.

[accelafine]

Well you've been enjoying the fruits of a so-called 'socialist' country your whole life apparently.

Not at all. My country has never been Socialist. The most you could say is that it's been broadly a "capitalist" country with a few social programs that are bankrupting it; but you couldn't ever call it Socialist, because Socialism has never been in control of the means of production, which is its fundamental goal, if you know the theory.

Socialist countries, historically, have LOW standards of living, and a high rate of death. And they don't just "tax," but actively attack the whole concept of private property as well.

So the social programs are "bankrupting" the country? If they took away the social programs and let the poor just die on the roadsides, would that be preferable?

He must mean 'socialist' things like the old age pension-- which he's likely enjoying.

[Immanuel Can]

Well you've been enjoying the fruits of a so-called 'socialist' country your whole life apparently.

Not at all. My country has never been Socialist. The most you could say is that it's been broadly a "capitalist" country with a few social programs that are bankrupting it; but you couldn't ever call it Socialist, because Socialism has never been in control of the means of production, which is its fundamental goal, if you know the theory.

Socialist countries, historically, have LOW standards of living, and a high rate of death. And they don't just "tax," but actively attack the whole concept of private property as well.

So the social programs are "bankrupting" the country?

Yep.

If they took away the social programs and let the poor just die on the roadsides, would that be preferable?

That would be bad, too. But there has to be a third alternative: a sustainable balance in medical provision. If there's not, then the system itself will collapse, and EVERYBODY will end up on the roadsides. Would you prefer that?

[Walker]

Many have found their interests sloughing into the waysides of irrelevancy when the Me Monster awakens to declare supremacy over topic.

[Walker]

So the social programs are "bankrupting" the country? If they took away the social programs and let the poor just die on the roadsides, would that be preferable?

Corrupted social programs, Gary, not social programs.
Corrupted immigration, Gary, not immigration.

Keyword: Corrupted. Cue the Democrats.

What stinks is that you already know the distinction, and for some reason you must muddy that clarity of distinctions in language that is designed to clarify meaning that represents reality.

For example, the Democrats opened the floodgates of the border for any and all who could set foot on American soil by hook or crook or cartel, to fall into the social safety net designed for, and paid for, tax payers. Democrats corrupted the immigration system all to hell.

Remember the hotels in NYC filled with illegals?
Talk about in-your-face unfairness and greed for political power at the expense of citizens.

[Age]

Not at all. My country has never been Socialist. The most you could say is that it's been broadly a "capitalist" country with a few social programs that are bankrupting it; but you couldn't ever call it Socialist, because Socialism has never been in control of the means of production, which is its fundamental goal, if you know the theory.

Socialist countries, historically, have LOW standards of living, and a high rate of death. And they don't just "tax," but actively attack the whole concept of private property as well.

So the social programs are "bankrupting" the country?

Yep.

LOL So, providing 'worker's money' to already monetary rich weapons manufactures does not 'bankrupt' a country, but, lol, providing medical, educational, and other help and support with 'that money' does 'bankrupt' a country.

And, 'this' coming from 'the one' who claims to be 'a christian' makes 'this' even more hilarious.

If they took away the social programs and let the poor just die on the roadsides, would that be preferable?

That would be bad, too. But there has to be a third alternative: a sustainable balance in medical provision. If there's not, then the system itself will collapse, and EVERYBODY will end up on the roadsides. Would you prefer that?

LOL As can be very clearly seen, here, 'these people', back when this was being written, still believed, absolutely, that money was needed, and necessary.

Which goes to show and prove just how twisted and distorted they really were, and thus why they kept created, and kept living within, a Truly twisted, distorted, and sick world.

[Walker]

Age, are you familiar with the generally accepted meaning of the idiom: take a hint, in relation to meaning, communication, and uncircumspection?

If the answer is no, 'tis a simple matter to consult AI for such basics, and then being alert to verifying the consult in human ways.

[Walker]

This method of referencing the backstory with the blue arrow, is a wonderful backstory invention for making form transparent enough for content to reveal.