Michael Daly wrote:
On 11-Feb-2005, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

I see them as two sides of the same coin, you don't have a
political
system without an economic system. They are joined at the hip. You
can't deal with one, without dealing with the other. Though I can
understand your fine line distinction.

There are democratic socialist countries, totalitarian capitalist
regimes
and everything in between. The choice of an economic system does not
dictate the political system.

Mike

Just for my CEU. certificate,

Totalitarian Socialist N. Korea, China, Ex-USSR

Democratic Socialist Britain, Canada, Germany,

Democratic Capitalist United States

Totalitarian Capitalist ?????????

Im sorry, I could not feel in the Blank, could you be so kind? Thanks
TnT

Tnt says:
========
Totalitarian Capitalist ?????????
=========

Nazi Germany springs to mind. Chile in a previous iteration.

Although, given the nature of this thread, I'm going to quibble with
you a bit. I'll contend that so long as nations confer welfare (both
individual and corporate), there exist absolutely NO capitalist
economies.

Like communism, capitalism is an interesting academic concept. I'm
reminded of my college physics texts which prefaced questions with
"assuming no friction" in order to make the theoretical concepts easier
to comprehend. In the case of both communism and capitalism, if you
could preface your explanations with "assuming no human avarice, ....
oh hell, let's keep it simple: assumimg no common human traits".

I find it interesting that you should label Canada as DS, and the USA
as DC. What lead you to that conclusion? In your mind, how is the USA
more capitalist than Germany?

Cheers,
frtzw906
++++++++++=

BCITORGB wrote:
Tnt says:
========
Totalitarian Capitalist ?????????
=========

Nazi Germany springs to mind. Chile in a previous iteration.

Although, given the nature of this thread, I'm going to quibble with
you a bit. I'll contend that so long as nations confer welfare (both
individual and corporate), there exist absolutely NO capitalist
economies.

Like communism, capitalism is an interesting academic concept. I'm
reminded of my college physics texts which prefaced questions with
"assuming no friction" in order to make the theoretical concepts
easier
to comprehend. In the case of both communism and capitalism, if you
could preface your explanations with "assuming no human avarice, ....
oh hell, let's keep it simple: assumimg no common human traits".

I find it interesting that you should label Canada as DS, and the USA
as DC. What lead you to that conclusion? In your mind, how is the USA
more capitalist than Germany?

Cheers,
frtzw906
++++++++++=

Oh yeah, I forgot about the NAZI, that means National Capitalistic
party! No wait, I am wrong, that was National Socialist Party. Sorry
they don't fill the bill.

Regarding Chile, I spent way to much time in Mexico, a Latin American
country, to believe you would put Chile forward as a defining example
of a Totalitarian Capitalistic country. Granted the beggar selling
pencils on the street could be considered a free Enterprise
entrepreneur, but hardly a capitalist. Judging from that, even N.Korea
could be a capitalistic country. Sorry again, you've got to do better
that that.

Regarding Canada as Ds, Us as DC, and Germany as DS. Maybe we get to
the heart of the difference of definitions. The D part has to how we
select or arrive at our leaders, and we seem to be in agreement here
that Democracy and elections are the preferable process. When we look
at the S or C distinction, is where we differ. I see it as more than
the production of profit aspect, but also the distribution of profit as
well. In a C environment the individual produces and determines the
distribution of the proceeds of the production. In a S environment, the
individual produces, and the government determines the distribution.
Now there are degrees of involvement of the individual and the
government in both production and distribution. Countries with more
involvement are defined as Socialistic, and countries with less, as
Capitalistic.

In the US we started out as the great experiment in capitalism, after a
shaky start at communism in some of the early colonies. Did not take
them long to figure out that would not work, so they issued everyone a
plot of land where they could raise their own produce, and sale any
excess for a profit. The Jamestown colony started prospering after
that. Not all the colonies were set up the same. However after the War
of Independence, and other struggles, they established the idea of
capitalism as being central in our country.

Then as a new country, they found they needed to raise taxes to support
a Dept of Defense, and then other necessary Depts. Finding out how
easy it is to raise taxes, and spend the money for our good, various
poiticians got the idea this was a good thing. Which brings us up to
today. There are some that want more federal involvement, hence more
taxes, and there are some who want less. Less fed, and less taxes. The
first are social liberals, and the second is capitalist conservatives.

There is no pure capitalism economy, and you are correct in asserting
this. But there are those of us who would like to keep it as
capitalistic as we can. All politicians love to collect money to spend
on their pet projects, and some are quite expensive. We can only hope
they are necessary, and that our politician is watching out for our
best interest.

I could consider myself more of a libertarian, though that doesn't hold
much clout in any government by definition. So you compromise. TnT

TnT wrote:
=============
Oh yeah, I forgot about the NAZI, that means National Capitalistic
party! No wait, I am wrong, that was National Socialist Party. Sorry
they don't fill the bill
============

Are you always taken in so easily by labels? Time for the history books
again. Do the names Farben and Krupp mean anything to you? You're not
about to tell that they were government owned concerns hiding under the
guise of private capital are you?

frtzw906
++++++++++

TnT says:
===========
Regarding Chile... Granted the beggar selling
pencils on the street could be considered a free Enterprise
entrepreneur,
===========

Beggars in the street! What are you talking about. Does the word MINING
meaning anything to you?

frtzw906

BCITORGB wrote:
TnT says:
===========
Regarding Chile... Granted the beggar selling
pencils on the street could be considered a free Enterprise
entrepreneur,
===========

Beggars in the street! What are you talking about. Does the word
MINING
meaning anything to you?

frtzw906

NAZI Germany, and Banana Republics with Government sanction, bought and
paid for National Economic Enterprises, whether mining, oil, or
armament factories, hardly make a capitalistic economy. Granted there
may be some oligarchs that profit hansomly, but always at the expense
of the masses, who eventually, usually pay with their blood. Think
Dauchau!

Have you been in the stinkhole of Socialism so long you can't smell the
difference any longer? Besides see the difference between Capitalism
and Nazism. You begin to sound like Ward Churchill as well. "We in USA
deserved 9/11!" TnT

TnT says:
==========
Granted there
may be some oligarchs that profit hansomly, but always at the expense
of the masses, who eventually,
===========

now you're talking! that's exactly one of my points!

"some oligarchs that profit hansomly" -- does that sounf familiar? have
you been drinking the kool-aid to the point you can't tell what your
economy looks like.

TnT says:
=========
Have you been in the stinkhole of Socialism so long you can't smell the
difference any longer?
=========

you still haven't defined why canada, in your opinion, may be
classified as "socialist" and the usa not. please give me specifics
rather than throwing labels around indiscriminantly.

TnT says:
==========
"We in USA
deserved 9/11!" TnT
==========

i believe it was one of your own nutbar, FC leaders who said the usa
deserved it because of loose morals or some such tripe. c'mon TnT,
think these things through....

frtzw906

BCITORGB wrote:
TnT says:
==========
Granted there
may be some oligarchs that profit hansomly, but always at the expense
of the masses, who eventually,
===========

now you're talking! that's exactly one of my points!

"some oligarchs that profit hansomly" -- does that sounf familiar?
have
you been drinking the kool-aid to the point you can't tell what your
economy looks like.

TnT says:
=========
Have you been in the stinkhole of Socialism so long you can't smell
the
difference any longer?
=========

you still haven't defined why canada, in your opinion, may be
classified as "socialist" and the usa not. please give me specifics
rather than throwing labels around indiscriminantly.

TnT says:
==========
"We in USA
deserved 9/11!" TnT
==========

i believe it was one of your own nutbar, FC leaders who said the usa
deserved it because of loose morals or some such tripe. c'mon TnT,
think these things through....

frtzw906

I agree labels leave alot to be desired, as they are not very
descriptive, and probably are more like fog than anything. I am not
personally familiar with Canada, so I do not claim to apply the label
from my own experience, but others more in the know have applied the
label. You tell me why you think it may or may not apply. TnT

TnT quotes someone else:
========
"We in USA
deserved 9/11!"
==============

The original topic included mention of christian fundamentalists. it
might be useful to turn the focus back on CF's and, for that matter
jewish fundamentists, islamic fundamentalists (and fundamentalists of
all and sundry "isms"). they are all, quite simply put, nutbars.

ok, i've got the name-calling out of the way. let's examine the facts.
an islamic fundamentalist nutbar causes planes to be flown into
buildings. is it because he hates american freedoms? yea, likely that's
one of a myriad of reasons. that's fundamental to all fundamentalists:
they hate freedom. they want to squeeze everyone into the same damned
mold. their mold.

a christian fundamentalist nutbar then opines that the planes flying
into buildings can be accounted for by the wrasth of god. god
apparently is angry at people because they've refused to adhere to the
mold prescribed by CF nutbars.

islamic fundamentalists (IF) insist that women cover up in public. how
ansurd! CF's support the notion that a female breast on a super bowl
half-time show be pixelated. stupid!

IF's stone women who speak to males other than family members. how
right out of the dark ages. CF's make spectacles of themselves at the
funeral of a gay man who, obviously, had liaisons with other men. how
medieval! [and i haven't even mentioned the nature of the young man's
death -- too much like stoning from my perspective].

IFs don't permit girls to go to school. backward! CFs demand that very
ordinary books (but clearly ones that don't fit their mold) used as
part of very ordinary high school english literature curricula be
banned. very backward!

how long should i go on for? and i haven't even touched jewish, sihk,
hindu, etc fundamentalists. dangerous nutbars, all of them.

these are simple people who for some reason can't cope with modernity.
rather than reason out issues using the best information available at
any point in time, they prefer the ancient writings of who knows who.

these are simple people who cannot handle diversity, ambiguity, and the
give-and-take of modern life. and because they are simple people
(simpletons?) they resort to the means of simple people -- violence.
whether CF or IF, "spare the rod and spoil the child" seems to be the
operative paradigm. for these simple people, use of the rod seems to
be the only outlet when faced with phenomena outside their ken.

it is odd, imho, that CFs can't see how very taliban-like their dogma
is.

frtzw906

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
TnT says:
==========
Granted there
may be some oligarchs that profit hansomly, but always at the
expense
of the masses, who eventually,
===========

now you're talking! that's exactly one of my points!

"some oligarchs that profit hansomly" -- does that sounf
familiar? have
you been drinking the kool-aid to the point you can't tell what
your
economy looks like.

TnT says:
=========
Have you been in the stinkhole of Socialism so long you can't
smell the
difference any longer?
=========

you still haven't defined why canada, in your opinion, may be
classified as "socialist" and the usa not. please give me
specifics
rather than throwing labels around indiscriminantly.
====================
Socilaist. Is that another 5-letter word to canadians? Oh wait,
maybe an 8-letter word.
Great education system you got there, eh? So, you don't teach
math and english, that must
mean all the time is spent in jingoistic
indoctrination.(questioning inflection)







TnT says:
==========
"We in USA
deserved 9/11!" TnT
==========

i believe it was one of your own nutbar, FC leaders who said
the usa
deserved it because of loose morals or some such tripe. c'mon
TnT,
think these things through....

frtzw906