Invite Friends

Topic: US Politics

Results in this view: Y-good Chance 44% - Convince Me 11% - N-unlikely 44%
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
  • 70
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
  • 4
Picture?type=square
  • 5
Picture?type=square
By Ray Benter tRump has lowered the bar on integrity and honesty, so he will continue to do what works with his low intelligence group. Bloomberg comes out of the same social/political wealthy candidate mix that New York produces. He is as rough and tumble as tRump, but he won't lie to gain advantage like tRump does. Maybe Bloomberg can finally call Agent Orange's bluff. I'd sure like to see real governance return to the White House.
Picture?type=square
  • 2
Picture?type=square
  • 3
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
By Janznice Lozinski You would like to see another Queer like Ovomit in the White house>? What is wrong with you?
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris You sound so illiterate Jan.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman first of all why is being gay an insult and second
it is pathetic that you make accusations with no proof
and to tok shame on you for allowing this to pass as acceptable social discourse it is hate speech Fighting words are, as first defined by the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) in Chaplinsky v New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942), words which "by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. ... Fighting words are a category of speech that is unprotected by the First Amendment.
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Tok said they suspended her. Wait William, you said it's ok to make accusations without proof. Which is it?
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman "she" was a sock puppet sue me
res ipsa loquitor some things are self evident on their face and need no further proof than the fact they exist
study law In the common law of torts, res ipsa loquitur (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself") is a doctrine that infers negligence from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence on how any defendant behaved. Although modern formulations differ by jurisdiction, common law originally stated that the accident must satisfy the necessary elements of negligence: duty, breach of duty, causation, and injury. In res ipsa loquitur, the elements of duty of care, breach, and causation are inferred from an injury that does not ordinarily occur without negligence.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman bye bye sock puppet
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Bloomberg is just as much a corrupt lying scumbag as Trump.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman hes a smart jew they run things anyways i'd vote for him might as well make it official
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Smart doesn't earn you make a good representative of the people.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman he was good for nyc
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Lol, he was awful for NYC.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman are you an anti semite?
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Lol, I am part Jew. And my dislike of him is about his world view and policies, not ethnicity.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman self hating?
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Lol, dont think so.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman you lost your job, dude i understand
the last time i got fired they had to commit me for a long long time
your lucky your wife can take care of you
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Ok, you can pretend I lost some job if it helps you sleep at night.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman where did you get all this free time
i'd be asleep by now if you hadnt left so many bloody comments
elder abuse
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris This takes no time.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman you made me miss dinner now i have to micro wave a burrito maybe two burritos
elder abuse
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Where do you get the time?
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman not much else to do when you spend life in a wheel chair
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Have some self control. Eat dinner next time
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris I know many active people in wheel chairs.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman if i had self control i would go on a fast
if i had self control i would not wiegh 400 poiunds and live most of my life in a wheel chair
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman do they have arthritis?
Picture?type=square
By Don Baumgartner Barack Obama was a Great POTUS !!! And his wife brought dignity & style back { tho only for 8 years comparing to the present occupant of the WH !!!}.
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Wrong, he was and is a Wall Street owned fake progressive. He cared nothing for rights, liberties or the US Constitution. A crony capitalist puppet.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman the obamas are perfect role models for the black community and the human race as a whole
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Lol, the worst.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman i loved and miss both of them they did have class and dignity
michelle was a strong smart black women
melania is just some cheap hooker with an eastern euopean accent
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris They are sell outs to Wall Street just like the orange Führer.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman well if you beleive in the free entrpise system the market you cant view the businss world as the enemy that never helped peoples lives
govt and business should try to co operate negotiate so tere is a balance betwwen what is good for business and what is good for the community
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman can your provide evidence of that?
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Yes, look at his donations, his cabinet and what he signed into law. There are quite a few books on it.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman all open to interpetation
and btw did you see how you deflected my requst for evidence
basically you replied "find it yourself"
to which i say
no the burden is on you you made the claim you must prove it
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris It's all there.
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris I told you where to find it
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman post it again
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman you made the claim it is your burden to rove your poiint
it isnt my obligation to prove you are right thats your job kirby mr lazy
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman boy some business ethic you have
no wonder your wife has to support you
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris How do you expect people to trust what you say when you lie about people and libel them? I told you where to get the proof. No rule that says I need to present it here. It's not a single document. Its 1000s of public documents. Do your own research not just believe the propaganda.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman i dont expect people to trust what i say i dont want them to, i want people to think critically i want people to think for themelves youve got tot work it out for yourselves people THINK FOR YOURSELVES YOU DONT NEED TO FOLLOW ME YOU DONT NEED TO D=FOLLW ANYBBODY! YOUVE GOT TO WORK IT OUT FOR YOURSELVES THINK FOR YOURSEVLES, LEARN TO THINK AND ACT ON YOUR OWN
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Not what I meant. I mean that if you lie about people and libel them, then they won't trust any info you give them. It won't make them think critically, but disregard any good info you might be able to give them.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman barakc was cool
donald is an orange faced circus clown
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Both owned by wall street.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman i think that is inaccurate and uncalled for
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman i'd like to see some evidence of that
libertarains would give the rich free reign you have little credibility on your claim
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris No, libertarians are against crony capitalism or state controlled capitalism or Corp running government. look at his donations, his cabinet and what he signed into law. There are quite a few books on it. True and called for.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman libertarian live in a past that never existed show me an exmple of a nation that functions on libertarain priciples you can they are impractical yto an absurd degree
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman give me an example of where libertarian policy rules an state well or even at all?
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris None have fully done so except on small levels, but many have had it in varying degrees like the USA. Ancient history.
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Nowhere has yours worked well.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman 1) he theoretical system of socialism with Chinese characteristics (Chinese: 中国特色社会主义; pinyin: Zhōngguó tèsè shèhuìzhǔyì, literally zhōngguó tèsè, meaning "Chinese characteristics"; and shèhuì zhǔyì meaning "socialism")[1] is a broad term for political theories and policies that are seen by their proponents as representing Marxism–Leninism adapted to Chinese circumstances and specific time periods. For instance, in this view Xi Jinping Thought is considered to represent Marxist–Leninist policies suited for China's present condition while Deng Xiaoping Theory was considered relevant for the period when it was formulated.[2]

The term entered common usage during the era of Deng Xiaoping and was largely associated with Deng's overall program of adopting elements of market economics as a means to foster growth using foreign investment and to increase productivity (especially in the countryside where 80% of China's population lived) while the Communist Party of China retained both its formal commitment to achieve communism and its monopoly on political power.[3] In the party's official narrative, socialism with Chinese characteristics is Marxism–Leninism adapted to Chinese conditions and a product of scientific socialism. The theory stipulated that China was in the primary stage of socialism due to its relatively low level of material wealth and needed to engage in economic growth before it pursued a more egalitarian form of socialism, which in turn would lead to a communist society described in Marxist orthodoxy.
if you define socialism as “the state owns and controls major portions of the economy,” then yes, absolutely. A lot of people say that China is communist in name only and is actually more capitalist than the US, but I don't agree. I think there are two things that make China seem more capitalist than it actually is:
One of the strangest claims about China that sometimes appears in the media is that it has a slow growth of consumption and living standards. In reality China has the fastest growth of consumption of any country in the world – whether this is measured only by household consumption or includes government consumption on areas vital for quality of life such as education and health. Furthermore, indicators show that compared to other countries, China's quality of life is better than would be expected from its present stage of economic development.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman Les Trente Glorieuses (French pronunciation: ​[le tʁɑ̃t ɡlɔʁjøz], "The Glorious Thirty") refers to the thirty years from 1945 to 1975 following the end of the Second World War in France. The name was first used by the French demographer Jean Fourastié. Fourastié coined the term in 1979 with the publication of his book Les Trente Glorieuses, ou la révolution invisible de 1946 à 1975 ("The Glorious Thirty, or the Invisible Revolution from 1946 to 1975"). The term is derived from Les Trois Glorieuses ("The Glorious Three"), the three days of revolution on 27–29 July 1830 in France.

Over this thirty-year period, France's economy grew rapidly like economies of other developed countries within the framework of the Marshall Plan such as West Germany, Italy and Japan. These decades of economic prosperity combined high productivity with high average wages and high consumption, and were also characterised by a highly developed system of social benefits.[1] According to various studies, the real purchasing power of the average French worker's salary went up by 170% between 1950 and 1975, while over-all private consumption increased by 174% in the period 1950-74.[2] The French standard of living, which had been damaged by both World Wars, became one of the world's highest. The population also became far more urbanized; many rural départements experienced a population decline while the larger metropolitan areas grew considerably, especially that of Paris. Ownership of various household goods and amenities increased considerably,[3][4][5] while the wages of the French working class rose significantly as the economy became more prosperous. As noted by the historians Jean Blondel and Donald Geoffrey Charlton in 1974,

If it is still the case that France lags in the number of its telephones, working-class housing has improved beyond recognition and the various 'gadgets' of the consumer society – from television to motor cars – are now purchased by the working class on an even more avid basis than in other Western European countries.[6]

Since the 1973 oil crisis, France's economy, while still faring well[citation needed] under François Mitterrand and Jacques Chirac, slowed down its explosive growth. Thus, the mid-1970s marked the end of the period.

In his book Capital in the Twenty-First Century, French economist Thomas Piketty describes the Trente Glorieuses as an exceptional "catch up" period following the world wars. He cites statistics showing that normal growth in wealthy countries is about 1.5-2%, whereas in Europe growth dropped to 0.5% between 1913 and 1950, and then "caught up" with a growth rate of 4% between 1950 and 1970, until settling back to 1.5–2% from 1970 onward.[7]
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman Dirigisme or dirigism (from French diriger, meaning 'to direct') is an economic doctrine where the state exerts a strong directive influence in a market economy, designating a capitalist economy in which the state plays a strong directive, as opposed to a merely regulatory role, over economic affairs.[1] As an economic doctrine, dirigisme is the counterpart to laissez-faire, stressing a positive role for state intervention in curbing productive inefficiencies and market failures. Dirigiste policies often include indicative planning, state-directed investment, and the use of market instruments (taxes and subsidies).

The term emerged in the post-war era to describe the economic policies of the French economy, which included substantial state-directed investment, the use of indicative economic planning to supplement the market mechanism, and the establishment of state enterprises in strategic sectors of the French economy. It resulted in an unprecedented economic and demographic growth, leading to the coinage of the term Trente Glorieuses ("Thirty Glorious [years]").

The term has subsequently been used to classify other economies that pursued similar policies, most notably the East Asian tiger economies, and more recently the economy of the People's Republic of China.[2] A related concept is state capitalism.

Most modern economies can be characterized as dirigiste to some degree – for instance, the state may exercise directive action by performing or subsidizing research and development of new technologies, through government procurement (especially military) or through state-run research institutes.[3]
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman The record years (Swedish: Rekordåren) describes the economy of Sweden during the international post–World War II economic expansion, until the 1973 oil crisis,[1] and largely coinciding with the mandates of prime ministers Tage Erlander and earliest years of Olof Palme. The original use was a satirical left-wing description of the years 1968-70.

Sweden had maintained neutrality during both world wars, and entered the post-war boom with industrial and demographic advantages. Sweden also received aid from the Marshall Plan. Between 1947 and 1974, the Swedish economy grew at an average rate of 12.5% annually. The urban population, living in towns of over 15,000 people, grew from 38% of the total population in 1931 to 74% by 1973. Sustained by an export boom of automobiles, heavy machinery, electronics, ship-building, and heavy weapons, the per capita income increased by as much as 2000%. Sweden had successfully moved into the high-income group of countries by 1955-56.
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman 1. Finland — Perhaps unsurprisingly, a Nordic state tops the list. Finland tops the list, climbing four places from last year's index. The country's current prime minister is Juha Sipilä.
3. Norway — The Scandinavian nation ranks higher in governance than in any other sub-index. Its parliament building, where Prime Minister Erna Solberg currently leads, 'the Stortinget,' translates as 'the great thing' or 'the great council.
4. Netherlands —The small western European country comes high up the list. The Hague, where its parliament sits, is home to over 150 international organisations, including the International Criminal Court.
5. Sweden —Sweden has fallen one place since last year's index but still ranks as one of the best-governed countries on Earth.
7. Denmark — Denmark comes high up the list, although behind several of its Scandinavian counterparts. Its national parliament is called the Folketing, which translates as 'the people's thing.'
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/17-best-governed-countries-world-a7417096.html
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris William, I believe you purposefully flood comments to cut off others from responding, making it look like that have no rebuttal.
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris LOL, first, you call for a brutal dictatorship not social democracy or democratic socialism. Your system never leads to a free prosperous society. You sacrifice one for the other. Never works for the greater good of freedom and prosperity
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris None of the systems you list but one, China, do what you want. Many of these arent even real socialism, but more fascism, because the businesses are still privately owned, though unlike fascism these governments dont strongly control them. They make deals.
Picture?type=square
By Kirby Liberty Harris Second, China is a politically repressive regime, no civil rights, though they gave up on no material wealth, because they realized that keeping their bourgeoisie(upper and middle class) comfortable was key to holding power, but their proles are still in poverty.