The 10 Planks..
Comments
-
And this is abolishment of private property? On the scale that Marx means to achieve communism?prfctlefts wrote:Ever heard of eminent domain ?
Eminent domain refers to the power possessed by the state over all property within the state, specifically its power to appropriate property for a public use. In some jurisdictions, the state delegates eminent domain power to certain public and private companies, typically utilities, such that they can bring eminent domain actions to run telephone, power, water, or gas lines. In most countries, including the United States under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, the owner of any appropriated land is entitled to reasonable compensation, usually defined as the fair market value of the property. Proceedings to take land under eminent domain are typically referred to as "condemnation" proceedings.
Eminent domain is about drawing the line between the public interest and private property, meaning that under specific circumstances the public may seize the necessary land to achieve public works that benefits all. Anyway, this is beside the point. Eminent domain does not equal abolishing private property communist style. Not even close.
...which we already have in Europe. Not the end of the world, not armageddon, and nothing to do with communism. Again, when Marx says redistribution, he fucking means it. Not tax adjustments designed to keep capitalism floating.Maybe not compared to some european countries,but it's coming. ie VAT TAX
No, it's not the same as abolishing inheritance. Abolishing it would mean the state takes everything when a person dies. Taxing a percentage is not abolishing inheritance.we have a death tax which is the same as abolition IS IT NOT ? and that's coming back.Better not plan on dying next year.
Generally, that some taxes exist that touches the subject is VERY FAR from abolition, which is what Marx is talking about. The inventors of this list are reaching to make the US look *gulp* communist, and can only convince anyone, because you frankly don't know what communism, or socialism for that matter, is. It has something to do with taxes, they reckon, so paying taxes must mean communism in some way...
Marx wanted to liberate the workers and establish classless society. That would also entail equalling out differences between country and city, ie between industrial workers and farmers. Also, the squalor he saw in the english cities of his day, which were appalling, probably inspired this passage.Isn't that exactly what Marx meant by Abolition distinction between town and country. :? in other words he wanted people to live closer togeather.
Uhm, yes it is. The trend is that governments have less control over these things, and private companies have moved in everywhere. America never had government control of these things, but they were monopolized heavily from the start instead. Monopoly is not communism. Neither is law texts that encourage inter-state trade and that places the responsibility to maintain good roads to this end to the various governments local and federal.that's not the trend here. as what was posted.
Uhm, at least 6 of these points are directly wrong. Or let me clarify that. What is stated under each point may be true in itself, the falsehood is that they bear any resemblance to the communist "planks" in the headlines. Particularly if you have any knowledge whatsoever about what communism entails. A tax is not "just about" abolishing or "along the same vein". Under communism you couldn't tax inheritance, because inheritance wouldn't exist. You wouldn't need eminent domain, because the state would own everything anyway. And so on.I think you are confused with all due respect. Everything is true about what was posted and the examples listed. They have been for the past 80 years
Peace
Dan"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 19650 -
inmytree wrote:
Spit Up My Nuts When I Saw This (Last Year)
Prfctlefts vs. OutofBreath
Gonna have to agree with Lefts that the US has been teetering closer to a socialist\communist backbone, but concede OOB the obvious point that the most draconian of the 10 planks are sorely missing in any overt form in the United States.
Although it would be foolish to look at Prfctlefts list and go, "oh shit, we're in straight hard line commy town",
i contend it would be dangerously naive to take OOB's point too far and dismiss the notion that there are substantial elements in the global elite that are (and for a long time have been) pushing for a overtly socialized society.
Does this mean we are up against a near term push for the abolition of inheritance or property rights?
Doubtful, as the amount of social upheaval this would cause is unfathomable.
But it DOES mean that those who value their personal liberties should be on constant guard against the encroachment of government.
Further, those planks that OOB concedes are the 3 to 5 MOST IMPORTANT to the *ESTABLISHMENT* of control over the many by the few via the power of the state.
The 3-5 that remain unimplemented (in any recognizable form akin to true communism) are those that would FINALIZE this domination of state over individual,. However, centralized banking, the income tax (which OOB can only say "isn't as high as elsewhere"), free indoctrination (er, education), and tight control over the media and agriculture (while neither is done in a true communistic sense, both are done through more subtle methods to achieve nearly the same effective ends) are of major consequence in the sphere of the current political state of this country, and it would behoove anyone with half a brain to consider those ramifications, and whether such implemented policies truly serve best the PEOPLE or rather their Masters-of-Sorts.
:(If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?0 -
socialized refers to a fair distribution of wealth ...
we are nowhere close to this ... what we have is a consolidation of wealth amongst the elite ...0 -
exactly....polaris_x wrote:socialized refers to a fair distribution of wealth ...
we are nowhere close to this ... what we have is a consolidation of wealth amongst the elite ..."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
I do not understand why people want to deny this.DriftingByTheStorm wrote:inmytree wrote:
Spit Up My Nuts When I Saw This (Last Year)
Prfctlefts vs. OutofBreath
Gonna have to agree with Lefts that the US has been teetering closer to a socialist\communist backbone, but concede OOB the obvious point that the most draconian of the 10 planks are sorely missing in any overt form in the United States.
Although it would be foolish to look at Prfctlefts list and go, "oh shit, we're in straight hard line commy town",
i contend it would be dangerously naive to take OOB's point too far and dismiss the notion that there are substantial elements in the global elite that are (and for a long time have been) pushing for a overtly socialized society.
Does this mean we are up against a near term push for the abolition of inheritance or property rights?
Doubtful, as the amount of social upheaval this would cause is unfathomable.
But it DOES mean that those who value their personal liberties should be on constant guard against the encroachment of government.
Further, those planks that OOB concedes are the 3 to 5 MOST IMPORTANT to the *ESTABLISHMENT* of control over the many by the few via the power of the state.
The 3-5 that remain unimplemented (in any recognizable form akin to true communism) are those that would FINALIZE this domination of state over individual,. However, centralized banking, the income tax (which OOB can only say "isn't as high as elsewhere"), free indoctrination (er, education), and tight control over the media and agriculture (while neither is done in a true communistic sense, both are done through more subtle methods to achieve nearly the same effective ends) are of major consequence in the sphere of the current political state of this country, and it would behoove anyone with half a brain to consider those ramifications, and whether such implemented policies truly serve best the PEOPLE or rather their Masters-of-Sorts.
:(
The eminent domain situation in my town the property was not for public use is was so the big developer here in my town could build a mall and condominiums. This developer has many friends in city hall“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln0 -
No one is denying this doesn't occur or even get abused at times... but to make it into some type of scenario in which "government is stealing people's lands and homes" for their own is not factual and that is the point this person/poster are making. That the government is taking over to create a socialist state with no possessions...aerial wrote:I do not understand why people want to deny this.
The eminent domain situation in my town the property was not for public use is was so the big developer here in my town could build a mall and condominiums. This developer has many friends in city hallCONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis0 -
i agree with Five...FiveB247x wrote:No one is denying this doesn't occur or even get abused at times... but to make it into some type of scenario in which "government is stealing people's lands and homes" for their own is not factual and that is the point this person/poster are making. That the government is taking over to create a socialist state with no possessions...aerial wrote:I do not understand why people want to deny this.
The eminent domain situation in my town the property was not for public use is was so the big developer here in my town could build a mall and condominiums. This developer has many friends in city hall
eminent domain was used here 16 years ago to expand our airport because it was a hub for TWA, American, and Delta airlines and they needed to add 2 runways...they paid people 3x the market value of their homes and the smart ones took it and moved. the ones that fought it for 5 years and held out only got market value which really sucked because once 80% of the neighborhood was wiped out and bulldozed the remaining market value dropped by over half of what it was. the other time it was used was 2 years ago when they expanded and made new highways and overpasses to relieve the bottleneck on a major interstate intersection here. those people got twice the market value. hell if the state wanted to take my house for infrastructure i would take the money and run. many people are upside down in their mortgages these days and would pray for something like eminent domain to bail them out...."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
Hmm... that's odd... where I come from, most of the large developers interested in malls and condos are private......aerial wrote:I have seen this in my town...people that do not want to sell there property taken (they pay them, but they don't give them what it is worth) buy the city under eminent domain, then sold to the large developers to build a mall or condos...live pearl jam is best pearl jam0 -
Wrong 'ism'aerial wrote:I do not understand why people want to deny this.
The eminent domain situation in my town the property was not for public use is was so the big developer here in my town could build a mall and condominiums. This developer has many friends in city hall
Wouldn't that be, nepotism?
Not communism...live pearl jam is best pearl jam0 -
Abolishment of private property-- No. Escalating taxes and increasing restrictions on how private property is to be used? Definitely. Although private property hasn't been completely done away with, it's becoming becoming harder to keep one's property, and less attractive to be a property owner for reasons other than eminent domain. How many tax foreclosures are out there, now owned by municipalities because property taxes have been too high with relation to the services provided by government? How much will these taxes rise FURTHER on the remaining property owners who have to now cover the burden of LOST tax revenue from property owners who couldn't make the payments? It's a vicious cycle-- and it's running rampant in the city where I currently live. There were serious talks of raising our taxes 82%. Eighty-two percent! Ridiculous. I don't care if it's socialist or fascist, totalitarian is totalitarian. Private property also extends beyond "property" in the real estate sense, and that includes wages generated by labor.DriftingByTheStorm wrote:inmytree wrote:
Spit Up My Nuts When I Saw This (Last Year)
Prfctlefts vs. OutofBreath
Gonna have to agree with Lefts that the US has been teetering closer to a socialist\communist backbone, but concede OOB the obvious point that the most draconian of the 10 planks are sorely missing in any overt form in the United States.
Although it would be foolish to look at Prfctlefts list and go, "oh shit, we're in straight hard line commy town",
i contend it would be dangerously naive to take OOB's point too far and dismiss the notion that there are substantial elements in the global elite that are (and for a long time have been) pushing for a overtly socialized society.
Does this mean we are up against a near term push for the abolition of inheritance or property rights?
Doubtful, as the amount of social upheaval this would cause is unfathomable.
But it DOES mean that those who value their personal liberties should be on constant guard against the encroachment of government.
Further, those planks that OOB concedes are the 3 to 5 MOST IMPORTANT to the *ESTABLISHMENT* of control over the many by the few via the power of the state.
The 3-5 that remain unimplemented (in any recognizable form akin to true communism) are those that would FINALIZE this domination of state over individual,. However, centralized banking, the income tax (which OOB can only say "isn't as high as elsewhere"), free indoctrination (er, education), and tight control over the media and agriculture (while neither is done in a true communistic sense, both are done through more subtle methods to achieve nearly the same effective ends) are of major consequence in the sphere of the current political state of this country, and it would behoove anyone with half a brain to consider those ramifications, and whether such implemented policies truly serve best the PEOPLE or rather their Masters-of-Sorts.
:(
As far as income taxes go, whether they are as high here or elsewhere really doesn't matter. Factor in the dozens of other taxes, tolls, and user fees, and yes, we are far over-taxed. Then, add in the vicious hidden tax of inflation, that is, the expansion of the money supply by the government which robs the currency of its purchasing power and hurts lower income families the worst.
I agree that the distribution of wealth does not coincide with the socialism ideal at all. This country has been gradually lowered into economic fascism, or the softer name, crony capitalism above all else, which inevitably leads to oligarchy.0 -
haffajappa wrote:
Hmm... that's odd... where I come from, most of the large developers interested in malls and condos are private......aerial wrote:I have seen this in my town...people that do not want to sell there property taken (they pay them, but they don't give them what it is worth) buy the city under eminent domain, then sold to the large developers to build a mall or condos...
exactly...
funny how private business get a free pass...0 -
Your right it is a private developerinmytree wrote:haffajappa wrote:
Hmm... that's odd... where I come from, most of the large developers interested in malls and condos are private......aerial wrote:I have seen this in my town...people that do not want to sell there property taken (they pay them, but they don't give them what it is worth) buy the city under eminent domain, then sold to the large developers to build a mall or condos...
exactly...
funny how private business get a free pass...
...Developer hangs out with the Mayor, Sates Attorney, and on and on...he wants land owned by someone. This person does not want to sell, so the city ( his buddies) comes up with eminent domain.
This is not a project to benefit the public. It is not a highway. It is not a utility...it is a condominium...and shopping malls. They give the landowner crap for the land. Then sell it to the Developer…..it is all politics, and it is a shame.“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln0 -
yeah but ...how does that make it communism?aerial wrote:
Your right it is a private developerinmytree wrote:haffajappa wrote:Hmm... that's odd... where I come from, most of the large developers interested in malls and condos are private......
exactly...
funny how private business get a free pass...
...Developer hangs out with the Mayor, Sates Attorney, and on and on...he wants land owned by someone. This person does not want to sell, so the city ( his buddies) comes up with eminent domain.
This is not a project to benefit the public. It is not a highway. It is not a utility...it is a condominium...and shopping malls. They give the landowner crap for the land. Then sell it to the Developer…..it is all politics, and it is a shame.
whether or not its a corporation or an individual, the fact is it's PRIVATE.
just because they obtained the land by having buddies in the right places, DOES NOT MAKE IT COMMUNISM
if that were the case, then EVERY political entity would be communists!
i think they need to offer the good citizens of the USA a handbook called Communism 101...live pearl jam is best pearl jam0 -
average american would get bored with that book real quick and say it's unamerican for me to be reading thishaffajappa wrote:i think they need to offer the good citizens of the USA a handbook called Communism 101...
:PRon: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?0 -
Yes the idiotic media can give a much better and faster account in a more entertaining (but hardly accurate) way!metsfan wrote:
average american would get bored with that book real quick and say it's unamerican for me to be reading thishaffajappa wrote:i think they need to offer the good citizens of the USA a handbook called Communism 101...
:Plive pearl jam is best pearl jam0 -
haffajappa wrote:
Yes the idiotic media can give a much better and faster account in a more entertaining (but hardly accurate) way!metsfan wrote:
average american would get bored with that book real quick and say it's unamerican for me to be reading thishaffajappa wrote:i think they need to offer the good citizens of the USA a handbook called Communism 101...
:P Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?0 -
communism? are we back in the 70s? wake the fuck up people!0
-
tbh, i'm sick of all the once-rural land being developed into shoebox townhouses where i live..._outlaw wrote:communism? are we back in the 70s? wake the fuck up people!
...but more than that, i'm scared shitless.
...for its a sure sign the Reds are coming!!live pearl jam is best pearl jam0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help