The REAL Truth in Iraq

[avowedly-agnostic]

For an understanding of an economic system where people work together for mutual benefit rather than greed and dominance, see cooperatives below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperatives

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

Can you cite a cooperative larger than a Kibutz or an Amish village? How do you expect the Federal Government to function as a cooperative?

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

"There are numerous examples of societies who worked (and continue to work in co-operatives) collectively (I'll need to spend some time looking for the relevant material however). But that was not the point I was making. My contention is humans are not - as you falsey allude- inherently greedy. Rather they're conscious about the welfare of their fellow men."

Maybe, maybe, but they are first and foremost concerned about their own welfare and that of their off spring. Remember, Capitlism is not a system. It is really the absence of a system. Obviously in modern terms we have built some structure around this system. But at it's root, capitalism is valueless and therefore you can not ascribe values to it, as you are trying to do.

"You're going to have to back that up I'm afraid. Simply saying Marx said such and such won't suffice to convince. And I disagree with that. Socialism doesn't change human nature, on the contrary, it affirms human nature. "

Socialism is the imposition of a system. Therefore it MUST be trying to coerce, since that is what systems do. In your extreme version of socialism, there is obviously no private ownership of property, certainly not of revenue earning property. Therefore whatever I build, I don't own. Whatever property I live on, I don't own.

What do you do with those of us who are anti-social, who don't want to live in cooperatives and make everyone around them miserable when compelled to do so? What do you do with the lazy bums (of whom there are a great many in the world) who are perfectly happy to let you do all the work in the cooperative? Look at a family - that's a cooperative. And my wife bitches daily that I don't do enough in it. Now extrapolate that out to a country the size of America.

"Alternatively you could look at Cuba with an excellent medical system, excellent education and miles ahead in enviromental conservation."

Cuba has an excellent medical system given its resources. And it has a decent educaitonal system - not comparable to the States however. But Cuba's industries (isn't that what we were just talking about?) totally suck. On top of that, their workers are poorly paid, housing is universally bad (unless you are a senior government minister), prostitution is rampant, and thousands are fleeing this marxist paradise with free medical care every year and at great risk.

"I'm sure they do, but it doesn't provide free medical care, or higher education. "

It doesn't provide free anything. Nothing is free. We pay for those services in taxes. Wake up.

"In relation to privatising services this is wrong. "

Depends on the service.

"I'm afraid not all comapnies cover their employess, hence why it should be availabe free of charge to all workers. "

It's never "free of charge". That's what you are not getting. Someone pays. You pay through your taxes, or you pay through your insurance, but you're going to pay.

"The US spends hundreds of billions of tax payer money to sustain an occupying army in Iraq, but it can't put average joe through school? Why isn't tax payer's money going to benefit the tax payer? "

It is. You can argue all you want that the Federal government doesn't spend it's money right. Except that you are not an American, which would mean you aren't paying the taxes, which would mean it ain't your buisiness how the Federal government distributes its tax resources. Ask 100 million Americans how that money should be spent, and you would get 100 million answers. The bottom line is the Americans have elected officials who they are free to replace every election if they are not happy about how the Federal and state institutions spend tax payer money. Keep in the back of your mind, the states do fund state colleges and universities and they are extremely cheap for state residents. Nobody doesn't go to college in the states because they can't afford it. You can ALWAYS get a college loan to cover the entire cost.

"They pay taxes don't they? And as such taxmoney ought to be spent not to wage war, but to improve education, the national health service, housing etc. "

Then how would you wage war? That costs money too. Oh, you don't think people should wage war? That's nice. Now, how about if we discuss the real world, where we do have wars and conflicts, where we do require police services because there are bad people who rape, steal and kill, and where we are not all sitting around singing Kumbaya? Again, HOW that tax money is spent is up to the elected officials. And if people are not happy with how the elected officials spend it, then they should elect someone else. This has nothing to do with Capitalism.


"No it's not "indisputable". Cuba has free education right through from kindergarten to graduate school. During the last twenty years education in Britain was free again from kindergarten to university. The idea that the US can't afford it is nonsense. Rather than putting taxpayer money to good use, the US administration throws literally billions of dollars down the drain on waging imperialist wars and sustaining occupations. "

How many Cubans go to graduate school? Germany has free education from Kindergarten right through graduate school, but has a MUCH LOWER per capita rate of graduation from university level education. The reason is easy. What governments do, they tend to do badly. Germany can not afford to have a university system where everyone attends. So they set the academic bar so high, that they cull the vast majority of potential students long before they are eligable to apply to a university. Again, the US has the highest PER CAPITA GRADUATION RATE AT THE UNIVERSITY LEVEL OF ANY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. Don't believe me, go check
"
When you pay taxes, I think you're more than entitled to be provided with a decent education, medical care, housing etc. "

A lot of people don't pay taxes. A lot of people (like my wifes Ex husband - 38 years old and never had a job in his life. Professionally unemployed) leach off of the system, if there is one to leach off of. And for those that do, your tax money in the States buys you police and fire protection, basic education and infrastructure and national defense and depending on the state various levels of unemployment benefits.

Again, your entire argument is specious and not based in fact or reality.

[gurey25]

MAD MAC cooperatives can get large.
one example is Mondragón in Spain.
The problem is that it is so big now its turned in to a major corporation.

and AA socialism is not the panacea of all ills, and captitalism is not the ultimate evil.

the only thing wrong with capitalism is

Bankers. those who dont produce, those who make money from money

[Gedo_Boy]

I remember a prof I had in college, it was a mathematically intensive Digital Signal Processing class, but he kind of went on a tangent (why I remember those the most )

He started talking about how the interest-based financial banking system of our day was mathematically unstable..........That is, it can't be sustained. He said it in passing as a mini reflection, but it kind of stuck with me.

That would probably explain the constant corrections occuring by way of war, pillage, exploitation.

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

"He started talking about how the interest-based financial banking system of our day was mathematically unstable..........That is, it can't be sustained. He said it in passing as a mini reflection, but it kind of stuck with me. "

Guess your professor forgot that the interest based banking system has been around for over 500 years.

The fact is, without interest based banking or financial markets, large financial endeavors are impossible. Any kind of buisiness or building project that requires billions, can only be undertaken with the support of interest based banking and market shares.

"That would probably explain the constant corrections occuring by way of war, pillage, exploitation."

How do you explain war, pillage and exploitation prior to interest based banking?

[avowedly-agnostic]

MAD

"Capitlism is not a system. It is really the absence of a system. Obviously in modern terms we have built some structure around this system. But at it's root, capitalism is valueless and therefore you can not ascribe values to it, as you are trying to do. "

Call it by whatever fancy name you like, the root issue is privatisation of the means of production by an elitist class is simply wrong.

"Socialism is the imposition of a system. Therefore it MUST be trying to coerce, since that is what systems do. "

By that standards, the police whose job it is to keep the peace, coerce us to be peaceful. And the public transport system, coerces us to take public transport. And our banks, coerce us to withdraw money from our accounts. So as you can see it's a rather ridiculous argument to make. Socialism is a political and economic system no doubt. That it's coercive and opposed to human nature is baseless. Socialism provides a philosophy of equality, democracy and a better life.

"there is obviously no private ownership of property, certainly not of revenue earning property. Therefore whatever I build, I don't own. Whatever property I live on, I don't own. "

You say such things as "obviously" and "indisputably" as if they're obvious and indisputable when the opposite is true. Whatever money you earn and the property with which you buy is indeed yours.

“Cuba has an excellent medical system given its resources. And it has a decent educaitonal system - not comparable to the States however. But Cuba's industries (isn't that what we were just talking about?) totally *****. On top of that, their workers are poorly paid, housing is universally bad (unless you are a senior government minister), prostitution is rampant, and thousands are fleeing this marxist paradise with free medical care every year and at great risk.”

Conditions can be kinda difficult when there is an embargo against your country. I didnÂ’t say Cuba was a utopia, just that it has a government which under economic constraints is doing right by its people providing them with such services as those which theyÂ’re rich neighbours in the US have to pay high prices for.

“It doesn't provide free anything. Nothing is free. We pay for those services in taxes. Wake up.”

By free I mean services be paid for by tax money.

“You can argue all you want that the Federal government doesn't spend it's money right. Except that you are not an American, which would mean you aren't paying the taxes, which would mean it ain't your buisiness how the Federal government distributes its tax resources. Ask 100 million Americans how that money should be spent, and you would get 100 million answers.”

YouÂ’re right IÂ’m no American, but I am a Brit and I speak as a person whose country is not (like the US government) spending tax payer money properly and as it ought to. If one were to ask Americans for what their priorities are as is regularly done through polls, the polls keep showing the same thing: Americans want more government spending on such essentials as healthcare and education. My contention is I donÂ’t want my government throwing hundreds of billions of our money down the drain on one misadventurous war after another, and then announcing to uni students that theyÂ’re going to have pay fees for their course because the government canÂ’t afford it. I along with the immense majority of Britons want the billions spent on occupation spent on us the taxpayer.

“How many Cubans go to graduate school? Germany has free education from Kindergarten right through graduate school, but has a MUCH LOWER per capita rate of graduation from university level education. The reason is easy. What governments do, they tend to do badly. Germany can not afford to have a university system where everyone attends. So they set the academic bar so high, that they cull the vast majority of potential students long before they are eligable to apply to a university. Again, the US has the highest PER CAPITA GRADUATION RATE AT THE UNIVERSITY LEVEL OF ANY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. Don't”

The argument “What governments do, they tend to do badly.” as an argument in favour of privatisation is just absurd. The reason the US has the highest per capita rate of graduation could be simply that it has an overwhelmingly bigger population than say Cuba of just 11 million. I don’t know how many students attend graduate school for I don’t have the information at hand, but the key point is it’s completely free of charge to students.

The difference between a socialist system and a capitalist one is socialism says there be free education (i.e. paid for by taxes), free medical care, free (or affordable) housing. Capitalism says, if a bus hits you, pay for the treatment, if you don't have wealthy parents to pay for your education, tough luck, etc. Given the choice between the two, I'd opt for the former which emphasises my needs than the latter which places more stress on profits.

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

"Call it by whatever fancy name you like, the root issue is privatisation of the means of production by an elitist class is simply wrong."

We'll come back to this theme in a minute, because you are not being consistent. But here, you are saying that private ownership of "production" is wrong. And what's with the elite thing? Is Bill Gates Elite? Is Thaksin Sinawatra Elite?

"By that standards, the police whose job it is to keep the peace, coerce us to be peaceful."

That is correct. This coercion is the price we pay, and are happy to pay, to be able to live in a productive and realtively safe society.

"And the public transport system, coerces us to take public transport."

This is incorrect. I can choose to take public or private transport.

"And our banks, coerce us to withdraw money from our accounts."

Again, incorrect. Banks provide services for savings, checking, investment and loans which you are free to avail yourself too or not. Many people have nothing to do with banks and live in a cash and carry world.

"So as you can see it's a rather ridiculous argument to make. Socialism is a political and economic system no doubt. That it's coercive and opposed to human nature is baseless. Socialism provides a philosophy of equality, democracy and a better life. "

Again, you argument was specious and illogical. FACT: Free market is the basic lack of a system. It says people are free to engage in entrepreneurship as they see fit. Socialism is the inverse of that. The government decides where capital will be invested at the expense of the individual.

"You say such things as "obviously" and "indisputably" as if they're obvious and indisputable when the opposite is true. Whatever money you earn and the property with which you buy is indeed yours. "

I refer you to point one, in which you said individuals were not free to invest their capital as they saw fit. Which is it? Let's say I save my pennies, and open up a lawnmower repair shop. It does well, and on the side, because I'm smart, I design a new kind of lawnmower and begin producing it in my shop. It sells well. I expand and hire more people. Soon, orders for my lawnmower are coming in faster than I can fill them. Before you know it, I have a buisiness worth hundreds of millions. In your socialist system, can I do this or not? This is called capitalism.

"Conditions can be kinda difficult when there is an embargo against your country. I didnÂ’t say Cuba was a utopia, just that it has a government which under economic constraints is doing right by its people providing them with such services as those which theyÂ’re rich neighbours in the US have to pay high prices for. "

Only the US has an embargo. Shouldn't be a problem for Cuba. Are you saying that the Cuban governments system for directing the economy would be effective if the US did not have an embargo? And how do you account for the high rates of prostitution and the horrible housing while the governments fat cats live it up?

"By free I mean services be paid for by tax money. "

That isn't free. If you increase my tax load by, say, 30% (the difference I would pay in taxes if I were Swedish vice American) that's 1,800 USD every month. That ain't free. You're going to pay, it's just a question of how.

"YouÂ’re right IÂ’m no American, but I am a Brit and I speak as a person whose country is not (like the US government) spending tax payer money properly and as it ought to."

Ought to according to whom? If the Brits are not happy how their tax money is spent, then they should vote for people who will spend it the way they see fit. If they can't figure out who is fit and who is not, then they do not deserve good governance. If you're a moron, and allow yourself to be led around by the nose, then life is tough. People get the governments they deserve. And no system is going to change that.

"If one were to ask Americans for what their priorities are as is regularly done through polls, the polls keep showing the same thing: Americans want more government spending on such essentials as healthcare and education."

Then Americans should vote for people who would allocate the resources accordingly. However, I should tell you, that the US government spends more money on health care than any other single thing, including the military. Health care right now is the PACMAN that is eating the US budget.

"My contention is I donÂ’t want my government throwing hundreds of billions of our money down the drain on one misadventurous war after another, and then announcing to uni students that theyÂ’re going to have pay fees for their course because the government canÂ’t afford it. I along with the immense majority of Britons want the billions spent on occupation spent on us the taxpayer. "

Then don't vote for people who spend money on military misadventures. That would be my advice.

"The argument “What governments do, they tend to do badly.” as an argument in favour of privatisation is just absurd."

No it is not absurd. It is a compeltely valid arguement.

"The reason the US has the highest per capita rate of graduation could be simply that it has an overwhelmingly bigger population than say Cuba of just 11 million."

Are you deliberately being obtuse here? Per capita means per person. I.e. percentage wise. Jesus Christ.

"I donÂ’t know how many students attend graduate school for I donÂ’t have the information at hand, but the key point is itÂ’s completely free of charge to students."

And because it's free of charge, very few students get to partake. Because the government can not afford to make it available for everyone. You see, free of charrge isn't really free of charge. Someone is paying. And if that someone is the government, then they have to work the expense into the budget.

"The difference between a socialist system and a capitalist one is socialism says there be free education (i.e. paid for by taxes), free medical care, free (or affordable) housing."

No, in YOUR SOCIALISM it says that the taxpayer is paying for those services, and does so through a significantly higher tax rate.

"Capitalism says, if a bus hits you, pay for the treatment, if you don't have wealthy parents to pay for your education, tough luck, etc."

Funny, I came from a lower middle class family, and I managed. Hmmm.

"Given the choice between the two, I'd opt for the former which emphasises my needs than the latter which places more stress on profits."

And you see, we have these things called elections. And in those elections we have socialist candidates. And those candidates don't draw any votes. That is because the majority of Americans reject a socialist system. Now, you might think you are smarter than all of us - The Brits (and Somalis too) are famous for hubris. But last I checked we are still entitled to vote for whom we see fit. And we are entitled to have the economic system that we feel is appropriate.

[avowedly-agnostic]

I won't respond to everything you've written for the simple reason that I don't have the energy to do so, but I'll touch on one key point. Your saying:

"If the Brits are not happy how their tax money is spent, then they should vote for people who will spend it the way they see fit...Then don't vote for people who spend money on military misadventures. That would be my advice."

This is just ridiclous and absurd. There was nothing in New Labour's manifesto (the current party in government) about going to war with Afghanistan or Iraq. There was no mention by Tony Blair that he would follow Bush everywhere. In the manifesto, and in a famous speech he gave he said "our priority will be education, education, education."

This is what Britons voted for. They voted for more spending on the national health service, education and public transport. Linking this to my previous point. That Tony Blair can turn around and tell students (whom he promised to deliver for) he can't pay for their education all the while spending literally hundreds of billions in maintaining the war machine in Iraq & Afghanistan is scandalous.

It's not the UK or US governments can't afford to put everyone through school, or pay for medical care, rather they misuse tax payer money waging imperialist wars to enrich such companies as Haliburton.

[biko]

[quote="avowedly-agnostic"]

I won't respond to everything you've written for the simple reason that I don't have the energy to do so[/quote]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"for the simple reason that I don't have the energy to do so"


may be you should give up plowing the back field!

just a thought.

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

"This is just ridiclous and absurd. There was nothing in New Labour's manifesto (the current party in government) about going to war with Afghanistan or Iraq. There was no mention by Tony Blair that he would follow Bush everywhere. In the manifesto, and in a famous speech he gave he said "our priority will be education, education, education."

This is what Britons voted for. They voted for more spending on the national health service, education and public transport. Linking this to my previous point. That Tony Blair can turn around and tell students (whom he promised to deliver for) he can't pay for their education all the while spending literally hundreds of billions in maintaining the war machine in Iraq & Afghanistan is scandalous. "

Then don't vote for labor next election. This is called democracy. If a politician doesn't do what you want, or if you feel the party has reneged and you are not happy with where they are leading the country, then vote for someone else. I fail to see how this is absurd.

"It's not the UK or US governments can't afford to put everyone through school, or pay for medical care, rather they misuse tax payer money waging imperialist wars to enrich such companies as Haliburton."

Of course they can't. Our educational system is the best in the world BECAUSE it is private. You will never convince me otherwise because I have seen the other side of the coin here in Germany. I can do the compare and contrast.

And if the electorate does not like how the elected officials are spending the money, or does not like the governments use of military force, THEN they can vote for other representatives. But you will note that in 04, when the electorate has a chance to bounce Bush, they did not. So obviously a majaority did not share your point of view. Maybe they will this election.

It seems to me you want some sort of system that guarantees that people who prefer the free market (like myself) do not have a voice in government while people who prefer more and more government control and a socialist system do have a voice. That is called fascism, not democracy.

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

I think Avowedly finally capitulated.

In all my travels in the world I have discovered that people are pretty much the same. Germans, Americans, Somalis, Haitians...each one it pretty much as likely as another to be swell or be a jerk. OK, the Somalis and environmentalists were total assholes.

I would like to end this debate with a clarion call....what exactly is a clarion call? A call made by a clarinette? I'd like to end this a lot of ways. Be nice to each other. That's the best advice I can give. The world's an imperfect place. What can I tell you. The quest for some sort of social justice or social perfection is a sysaphean task. You'll never get there. And be careful you don't turn the world on its head with some sort of Maoist quest while trying to get there.

[avowedly-agnostic]

Continuing on with my life is hardly what may be called capitulating MAD. This debate was initially about the driving factor behind aggressive US foreign policy in the Mid-East & the Americas: imperialism.

You're perfectly entitled to your opinions- and I'd like to think that I've for the most part been respectful of your beleifs. One disappointment I do have from talking with you however , is your apparent lack of any guiding principles or ethics.

That for example you would never refuse deployment to an illegal war and your belief America can never do wrong speaks volumes about the type of soldier and person you are. Your blind obedience to a US administration with little regard for humanity and international law is a cause for concern in anyone.

As for me I'm a believer in socialism. Why am I a Socialist? Simply put, I know another world free from hunger, war and injustice is possible. I don't believe Socialism can cure all the ills in society, but it can certainly remedy the gross inequalities attributable to capitalism. I have no delusions about convincing you of the pressing need for a Socialist model. So debating back and forth with our heels firmly dug in regarding issues we're not inclined to agree on is admittedly a waste of my time as well as yours.

With that I say take good care of yourself my Yankee friend, and keep your eyes peeled for any IEDs which may come your way.

[Steeler [Crawler2]]

Avowedly
I have ethics. They just aren't yours. I am not an internationalist. I am a realist. And I am a professional soldier. There are rules to that game, rules that you can never understand.

And so far, so good on the IEDs. Thought I was going to have some bad luck up by Hosh on 21 October Road a while back, but escaped unscathed.

See you at MAC's Cafe in Thailand some day.