The basis of Marxist/Socialist theory is "FROM each according to his ability, to each according to his need"...or as Obama puts it, "spreading the wealth...is a good thing"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A look at current events from the point of a view of a Conservative Evangelical Christian who stands firmly on the Word of God (that's the Bible for those of you at Berkley) and stands behind the Constitution of the United States of America. So grab yourself a big cup of java, kick back in your chair and enjoy another member of the "vast right wing conspiracy" making his voice heard.
8 comments:
First of all, get the quote right. It's, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
Second of all, explain why that is a bad thing.
FIRST OF ALL...it's a typo, so get over your self righteousness.
Second of fall, do you really see nothing wrong with Marxism and Socialism? Even the public school education i obtained back in the 70's and 80's taught communism was inferior to capitalism at best and just not good for society in general. See the former USSR for example, or how about modern China or North Korea...yeah, good places to live!
Maybe you just slept through that social studies class, right?
So i guess liberalism really is borderline communism.
I'm specifically talking about that quote. Read the words and tell me what's wrong with what the words are saying. Do you disagree with the concept behind the words--that everybody should do the best he can at whatever his work is, and that he should have a roof over his family's head and food on the table?
The problem with the quote is that it is the heart of marxist thought and has nothing to do with what you are suggesting. The premise of Marxism is that all are equal, no "common man" should have more than anyone else and if the government needs to take from one to benefit the other...so be it. Once again, i first learned this in 4th social studies, i'm guessing you made it that far, right?
It has nothing to do with doing the best you can to provide and care for your own. Rather it has everything to do with doing the best you can so that someone other than you and your family will recieve benefits you deserve.
Historically this has proven to be a far more inferior economic theory than capitalism and would mean the destruction of this great nation as we know it. But then again if you think this nation is anything but great then socialism is good for you...right Doc?
You have a glaring, fundamental misunderstanding of the quote and the concepts that underlie it, which is odd indeed, seeing as how you "learned" the whole thing in fourth grade. The word "learn" apparently does not mean what you think it means. Or maybe it simply means that you have a fourth-grade understanding of the topic.
And in typical liberal fashion when you can't defend the indefinsible (like Marxism/Socialism) you resort to making some sort of snide personal attack. Read it again, FIRST learned in 4th grade, which occured back in the day when you got an education in the public school system...pre-Ted Kennedy NCLB.
I would hope you learned lessons as a child that you held through out life Doc, obviously right and wrong is out of the question, and American history is questionable also.
And please tell me my misunderstanding of socialism since apparently i seem to be blinded by my American free enterprise bias. Marxis and Socialists (and liberals) believe in taking from the rich, giving to the government to disperse who they see fit to create an "equality". And that is the problem...the government doing it.
I do my best to help those who have less than me financially and with my time and effort (which your 2 candidates tend to do only during election years if you check their tax records); and i have no need for Fed-zilla saying it wants more of my money to help "spread the wealth" as they see fit.
No fundamental misunderstanding, just a knowledge that socialism is a failed system at best.
There's some shade of difference--some nuanced distinction--between "learned in fourth grade" and "FIRST learned in fourth grade" that is so small as to be invisible. To my ears--admittedly inexperienced except for nineteen years in the learning biz--the two are the same thing. But okay.
If your Sunday gig is your fulltime gig, I'm guessing that even I get paid more than you do, and I don't get paid very much. I'm not trying to insult you about your job; I'm simply guessing that ministers just don't get paid very much, however important the job is. The same can be said of many, many jobs; Even my job, at a salary that is higher than the median for my position, is often not enough for me to pay all the bills each month.
Why is it that a minister or a checkout clerk or a maid or a farmworker, all of whom have important jobs and all of whom put in full-time work plus overtime, make less than, say, a local TV news anchor?
Why is it that a woman who works her butt off every day being the bast maid that she can possibly be can still not support her family?
Why should a person who is doing her darnedest to put food on the table--a woman who is producing to the best that her ability and training and education allow her to produce--be unable to make ends meet?
Your take on this seems to be, "It serves you right, woman; if you weren't so worthless, you'd be a corporate CEO and you wouldn't have to worry about making the rent each month. You get, my good scullery maid, exactly what you deserve."
Is that actually how you feel? I find that difficult to believe, but it's what your words are saying, even if it's not your intent.
You know Doc, i really do feel sorry for you sometimes because i really don't think you get it.
First of all, and here is where you can claim i'm "foaming at the mouth"; my "Sunday gig" as you like to insult my job as is more often than not a 7 day a week position where i'm constantly on call. And while i am primarily seen on Sunday mornings and evenings, my job has me in my community daily in various ways as well as 30 miles in any direction doing ministry work. And i can guarantee that no one is knocking on your door at 10:30 at night wanting food, gas or a place to stay...and if they would, and you were to actually open the door i'm sure you would send them to the nearest guy who has a "Sunday gig". So i would ask that you actually show enough respect to not refer to my position as being Sunday only since you have no idea what i do.
And since i'm guessing that behind that veil you wear online that you are an "educator" and i'm guessing in the public eduction realm, that must mean you are also teaching your students that socialism is a good thing. As hard as it is for us to pay tuition every month for my kids to be in a private school and to buy their books (while still paying taxes for a failing public school system) apparently it is well worth the sacrifice we make to keep them from learning those types of lies.
And you are really good about twisting what people say; are you sure you don't work for the B. Hussein Obama campaign in your spare time? I never once said that someone who works hard doesn't deserve to paid for their hard work...but i will say people should also not be punished for their success. And those who choose not to work and live off of those of us (like you) who work hard should not be rewarded with a tax refund when they don't pay taxes to begin with.
I'm all for tax breaks for those who work hard, and as a tax payer i welcome that...but using hard earned tax money to increase the nanny state is unacceptable; and i would think that even a liberal would agree with that.
Post a Comment