Socialism: not such a big hit with the Venezuelan refugees rooting through dumpsters in Ecuador; but hey, what do they know?
This is why leaving Canadians in Venezuela or North Korea is doing the community a great service.
Nahh … the starving and poverty version of Socialism … is simply Socialism done “incorrectly” …
Now Trudeau is doing Socialism RIGHT !!! He’s gots LOTS of $$$ for indigenous peoples … immigrants ovvvvv culllller … and grifters of every stripe. They’ll all stay put and grab all they can
At this point, who cares?
People have it coming.
“The problem with socialists is that eventually they run out of other people’s money.”
Margaret Thatcher
Foolish, self absorbed young people. The trouble with socialism is that it’s only one mere &#$% hair away from communism or fascism. These same idiots want all of the benefits of capitalism, but on the backs of the producers. Socialism is actually a religious system, grounded in envy and perpetuated in lies that if someone has more than you, it was ill gotten and therefor evil and must be destroyed. Sure, have your socialism, but seen through to the end, the outcome is always bloody and full of despair.
This is why Canada is never going to amount to it’s potential.
70% of Canadians are left-wing, envy-fueled, welfare bums.
It’s also why people need to manage their expectations for Pierre Poilevre’s Cuckservative Party of Canada. It’s unlikely given Progressive hegemony that the Cuckservative Party will ever again win a majority government in this country. It’s unlikely that if they do win a minority they will be allowed to govern Harper-style (2006-2011). It’s unlikely that if they do win a minority and they are allowed to govern Harper-style (2006-2011) anything that matters will change in anyway whatsoever.
Let Canada burn.
I agree totally. The sooner, the better.
Not even worth the match to light it. A wretched land full of horrible, tiny people.
I can see no other way out.
And that is why we will separate.
There are no conservatives in Can Ahh Duh and no place for them.
The school system at all levels preaches socialism as dogma. Nullam gratuitum prandium – there is no free lunch and the bill always comes due, it is only a question of when.
I wonder how long it will take to allow voting from age five to sixteen only…….,
But GerryK they would all vote for Trudeau. Maybe. Well educated Liberal women often don’t have kids. They want kid’s toys like German cars and crossover surfing boats and adult-only vacations in Costa Rica.. Conservatives who have kids generally have more (than general population) conservative kids. Like my kids. The youngest is a teenager and has been listening to Ben Shapiro for years. The oldest listens to Joe Rogan.
Teach your children well.
PHP2, I’ve been conservative my whole adult life, not extreme or far right wing, but definitely conservative.
Sadly, my now almost 43 year old son has drunk gallons…sorry, liters, of enriched coolaid, and we rarely talk, although we both try, and my almost 39 year old daughter is kind of on the fence teeter tottering between liberal values and conservative values. I just wonder what I did wrong in not being able to instill my values in my own children!
As has been stated many times, for most, they are socialist when they are young, liberal in their early adult years, and grow into conservatives in their advancing years, when reality begins kicking em in the butt. I just hope that my kids will….one day, understand or realize, oh yeah, so dad was right about most things.
Not holding my breath.
I doubt that you could find a dozen teachers in Canada who could give a coherent description of socialism, communism, fascism, libertarianism, and capitalism nor could you find a dozen commenters here to agree on the same.
The most common perspectives of socialism among the group were “government providing more services like healthcare, education and daycare” (67%), and “the government guaranteeing a certain level of income for all citizens” (59%).
I doubt that you could give a coherent description of socialism, communism, fascism, libertarianism, and capitalism
The autobiography of Milton and Rose Friedman tells a story about Ludwig von Mises that was retold in the Sunday New York Times book review. In 1947, some free-market economists, including Friedman and Mises, came together to form the Mont Pelerin Society. But Mises was clearly agitated at the ideological tenor of the discussion at a meeting of the society. Finally, Mises stood up and shouted, “you are all a bunch of socialists,” and stamped out. In Friedman’s story, the Mont Pelerin Society went on to glory as the fountainhead of the classical-liberal revolution.
At the meeting where the famed blowup occurred, several economists were debating how to structure the tax system so the government could collect the most revenue while not distorting the operation of the free market.
To Mises, this discussion presumed several wrongheaded notions.
First, that the government is entitled to collect as much revenue as it can get away with collecting.
Second, that the taxes of the 1950s were not fundamentally injurious to the market economy.
Third, that economists should be in the business of giving advice with an eye to what is best for the state.
Fourth, that there is a branch of economics dealing with tax theory that can be considered as separate and distinct from the whole of economics.
Fifth, that economists should try to design measures of government interference to achieve optimal results.
To Mises, economists had a role in the political life of the nation. But it was not in making life easier for the state and the political class. It was not in becoming specialists in providing rationales for the expansion of state power. To Mises, this was a betrayal of economics.
Mises has been criticized for not toning down his criticisms of government. He never followed the advice of the people who said: You’re a great economist, but you would be taken much more seriously if you were not so unyielding.
If Mises had listened to this advice, he would indeed have been much better off. He might have been appointed to a chair at the University of Vienna. Instead, he conducted his seminar from his offices at the Vienna Chamber of Commerce. He might not have been driven out of his country. Instead, the invading National Socialists regarded him as perhaps the most dangerous intellectual opponent of their ideology. Once arriving in the U.S., he might have been awarded a prestigious post at an Ivy League university. Instead, his salary came from outside sources, and he was never more than an unpaid visiting professor at New York University, relegated by the statist dean to a dank basement classroom.
Mises’s perseverance in the cause of freedom cost him dearly. He writes in his autobiography that he was often reproached by his friends in Vienna “because I made my point too bluntly and intransigently, and I was told that I could have achieved more if I had shown more willingness to compromise.”
But, Mises said, “I could be effective only if I presented the situation truthfully as I saw it.” He concludes, “as I look back today…, I regret only my willingness to compromise, not my intransigence.”
Sez You:
I am very familiar with the content of your post.
Thank you for the review. I read a great deal of Mises, Rothbard and Hayek.
Kinda lost interest in recent times having concluded that the world envisioned by these stalwarts would never EVER arrive.
One of Rothbard’s tomes was Power and Market. Sadly power will trump markets until human nature changes which is never.
I can’t get anyone here to describe conservatism to my satisfaction. Or anyone else at any other supposedly conservative site.
I guess “conservative” simply means, “not liberal”, whatever the hell THAT means.
Btw, I am all in favor of communism if I get to be Stalin.
It’s why I left it off the definitions. Conservatism is a coalition almost as disparate as are the above. The only practical definition IMHO is ‘fatally compromised libertarianism with all of the rest’. In a four quadrant box representing two axes of economic and civil liberty where communism is the diagonal opposite of libertarianism and communism is flanked by socialism and fascism, conservatism would be an large amorphous blob dead center and overlapping all and the LPC would be the same centered closer to communism and the NDP, closer still. The only place more lonely than the deep communists would be the libertarians, you know, the “whackos” who wrote the US Constitution.
Thank God I’m old enough. Because today’s high-school/univ generation will finish what Dems/Liberals started. Aka completely destroy N America. I’ve seen what’s trending in young generation: Socialism, St Greta stuff, and gender/race/Islamophobia-combat crap. And if any of ’em are against the grain, they are automatically deemed extreme/alt-right, something-phobes, climate-change deniers etc.
DanC:
All true. Read today that UK has determined that people who read 1984 and Brave New World are right wing extremists.
They don’t know what Socialism is. They think it means the ability to free-ride off of non-socialists.
Except in real socialism, there are no non-socialists (left,) except for the one in 250,000 people who can manage a grift of some kind.
You can take my word for it. I lived in East Germany.
Young people have spent most of their lives living in a pseudo-socialist system – all their needs being taken care of by parents. So it’s only natural that they might think that’s the best economic system.
In theory.
Sounds so fair.
What they haven’t learned is what life is like in actual socialist societies, and that history demonstrates that you can vote your way into socialism, but you almost always have to shoot your way out.
Sadly DM, so have their parents. The government absorbs most of the economy and monopolizes control of the big things, leaving an infantilized nation afraid of thinking, rather have “mommy government” do it.
That and the Scottish mindset pervades. More interested in their neighbour’s failure than their own success. Less pressure that way. We deserve the fate which awaits us.
Peter, what I meant was a family is a sort of socialist system for the kids. Mom and Dad supply all their needs. So naturally at age 16 they are submersed in a socialist lifestyle.
Their parents were too at that age, so is everyone. In the past, logical people decided that people should be adults with adult responsibilities in order to make responsible voting choices, so no votes for kids.
I know, DM, I just offer that for the last 50 years, everyone has been immersed in socialism, starting with medicare.
None of the people who support socialism could define it. I have yet to meet anyone who tells me they like socialism that can define it.
Most think its about kindness, and tolerance and diversity, and helping the poor. And free stuff.
The most common perspectives of socialism among the group were “government providing more services like healthcare, education and daycare” (67%), and “the government guaranteeing a certain level of income for all citizens” (59%).
On the other hand, look what we gave them.
A country where young people will -NEVER- own a house unless Mom and Dad buy it for them.
A country where everything you buy is made somewhere else, and every job you try to get is being done for peanuts by a foreigner. See any white house painters lately? No you haven’t.
A country where farmers are told not to farm, builders are told not to build, and everybody is called a racist.
A country where if you do by a miracle land some cruddy job in some cruddy company, the government takes half your wages one way or another.
So yeah, no doubt they’d like some of that free stuff. It’s the only stuff they think they’re going to get. They’ve been told all good comes from government since they were in nursery school, it is not a surprise they believe it.
The fun part is going to happen when even oblivious young stoners in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver can’t ignore that they’ve been lied to their whole lives, because they’re don’t have food and they don’t have a house, and even Mom and Dad don’t have a house. That could get spicy.
That is about five years out at the current rate of acceleration. Coming soon to a city near you.
Dont worry Phantom – Bill S-233 – UBI will be law sooner rather than later – and all will be well!
S-233 sounds like a Soviet cruise missile. Will probably do -much- more damage.
VERY WELL SAID, The Phantom.
I chuckled (rather than weep) reading about the “just transition” plan to 2050. The plan includes a special agency performing reviews of progress every 5 years and of course knob twirling adjustments.
So, we are entering the era of The Five Year Plan. If the yutes had any knowledge of history they’d be thinking ‘uh oh’.
You nailed it. Just wait till they have to pay for it!
Fun times to be had.
Why wouldn’t they? Where would they get such an idea and what would they hear to have them think differently?
When canada is no longer using coal, oil and gas to run the country, eating will be the least of their problems from Oct to May. Good luck a holes.
IAM TIRED OF SAYING IT, CANADIANS ARE STUPID, YOUNG OR OLD APPARENTLY.
The USA isn’t far behind.
The joke’s on them. We already mortgaged their future.
An additional irony.
Those promises of “Free Stuff” all come with conditions.
You will get your “free Medical Treatment” some time..maybe,,are you dead yet?
Well we cannot help you with that illness,but we can end your life..
So sure the kiddies all want “Free Stuff” but even they should be able to sense the track record of the promisers.
Worthless Words,is all they are ever going to deliver.
Re: “Many young Canadians felt socialism was defined as receiving more from the government.”
This kind of sums it up neatly. I’m old enough I likely won’t be around to laugh when it all comes crashing down. Reality really is a bitch.
If you asked each of these turds if their classmates who got 85% or higher should give some of their grade marks to the lazy/stupid kids (sub 55%ers) I wonder what their answer would be?
And then I wonder how they’d feel if the class forced them to do it?
Or, if they’re working types, if they should give a portion of every after-tax pay cheque to people who make less, I wonder what their answer would be?
And then I wonder how they’d feel if a stranger forced them to do it.
I know someone who, once they started making good coin – not great, just good – started giving to a charity. Every month now for nearly 25 years. And they even added two other lesser charitable donations per month for at least the last 5 years. I wonder what these ignorant turds would think of that dude?
(Per capita in Canada by province, K-becers give the least to charity. Albertans the most. Surprised?)
An ignorant populace is doomed to be poor and miserable.
Fck Canadians and their pathetic “education” system.
What a disgrace.
Socialism: not such a big hit with the Venezuelan refugees rooting through dumpsters in Ecuador; but hey, what do they know?
This is why leaving Canadians in Venezuela or North Korea is doing the community a great service.
Nahh … the starving and poverty version of Socialism … is simply Socialism done “incorrectly” …
Now Trudeau is doing Socialism RIGHT !!! He’s gots LOTS of $$$ for indigenous peoples … immigrants ovvvvv culllller … and grifters of every stripe. They’ll all stay put and grab all they can
At this point, who cares?
People have it coming.
“The problem with socialists is that eventually they run out of other people’s money.”
Margaret Thatcher
Foolish, self absorbed young people. The trouble with socialism is that it’s only one mere &#$% hair away from communism or fascism. These same idiots want all of the benefits of capitalism, but on the backs of the producers. Socialism is actually a religious system, grounded in envy and perpetuated in lies that if someone has more than you, it was ill gotten and therefor evil and must be destroyed. Sure, have your socialism, but seen through to the end, the outcome is always bloody and full of despair.
This is why Canada is never going to amount to it’s potential.
70% of Canadians are left-wing, envy-fueled, welfare bums.
It’s also why people need to manage their expectations for Pierre Poilevre’s Cuckservative Party of Canada. It’s unlikely given Progressive hegemony that the Cuckservative Party will ever again win a majority government in this country. It’s unlikely that if they do win a minority they will be allowed to govern Harper-style (2006-2011). It’s unlikely that if they do win a minority and they are allowed to govern Harper-style (2006-2011) anything that matters will change in anyway whatsoever.
Let Canada burn.
I agree totally. The sooner, the better.
Not even worth the match to light it. A wretched land full of horrible, tiny people.
I can see no other way out.
And that is why we will separate.
There are no conservatives in Can Ahh Duh and no place for them.
The school system at all levels preaches socialism as dogma. Nullam gratuitum prandium – there is no free lunch and the bill always comes due, it is only a question of when.
I wonder how long it will take to allow voting from age five to sixteen only…….,
But GerryK they would all vote for Trudeau. Maybe. Well educated Liberal women often don’t have kids. They want kid’s toys like German cars and crossover surfing boats and adult-only vacations in Costa Rica.. Conservatives who have kids generally have more (than general population) conservative kids. Like my kids. The youngest is a teenager and has been listening to Ben Shapiro for years. The oldest listens to Joe Rogan.
Teach your children well.
PHP2, I’ve been conservative my whole adult life, not extreme or far right wing, but definitely conservative.
Sadly, my now almost 43 year old son has drunk gallons…sorry, liters, of enriched coolaid, and we rarely talk, although we both try, and my almost 39 year old daughter is kind of on the fence teeter tottering between liberal values and conservative values. I just wonder what I did wrong in not being able to instill my values in my own children!
As has been stated many times, for most, they are socialist when they are young, liberal in their early adult years, and grow into conservatives in their advancing years, when reality begins kicking em in the butt. I just hope that my kids will….one day, understand or realize, oh yeah, so dad was right about most things.
Not holding my breath.
I doubt that you could find a dozen teachers in Canada who could give a coherent description of socialism, communism, fascism, libertarianism, and capitalism nor could you find a dozen commenters here to agree on the same.
The most common perspectives of socialism among the group were “government providing more services like healthcare, education and daycare” (67%), and “the government guaranteeing a certain level of income for all citizens” (59%).
I doubt that you could give a coherent description of socialism, communism, fascism, libertarianism, and capitalism
The autobiography of Milton and Rose Friedman tells a story about Ludwig von Mises that was retold in the Sunday New York Times book review. In 1947, some free-market economists, including Friedman and Mises, came together to form the Mont Pelerin Society. But Mises was clearly agitated at the ideological tenor of the discussion at a meeting of the society. Finally, Mises stood up and shouted, “you are all a bunch of socialists,” and stamped out. In Friedman’s story, the Mont Pelerin Society went on to glory as the fountainhead of the classical-liberal revolution.
At the meeting where the famed blowup occurred, several economists were debating how to structure the tax system so the government could collect the most revenue while not distorting the operation of the free market.
To Mises, this discussion presumed several wrongheaded notions.
First, that the government is entitled to collect as much revenue as it can get away with collecting.
Second, that the taxes of the 1950s were not fundamentally injurious to the market economy.
Third, that economists should be in the business of giving advice with an eye to what is best for the state.
Fourth, that there is a branch of economics dealing with tax theory that can be considered as separate and distinct from the whole of economics.
Fifth, that economists should try to design measures of government interference to achieve optimal results.
To Mises, economists had a role in the political life of the nation. But it was not in making life easier for the state and the political class. It was not in becoming specialists in providing rationales for the expansion of state power. To Mises, this was a betrayal of economics.
Mises has been criticized for not toning down his criticisms of government. He never followed the advice of the people who said: You’re a great economist, but you would be taken much more seriously if you were not so unyielding.
If Mises had listened to this advice, he would indeed have been much better off. He might have been appointed to a chair at the University of Vienna. Instead, he conducted his seminar from his offices at the Vienna Chamber of Commerce. He might not have been driven out of his country. Instead, the invading National Socialists regarded him as perhaps the most dangerous intellectual opponent of their ideology. Once arriving in the U.S., he might have been awarded a prestigious post at an Ivy League university. Instead, his salary came from outside sources, and he was never more than an unpaid visiting professor at New York University, relegated by the statist dean to a dank basement classroom.
Mises’s perseverance in the cause of freedom cost him dearly. He writes in his autobiography that he was often reproached by his friends in Vienna “because I made my point too bluntly and intransigently, and I was told that I could have achieved more if I had shown more willingness to compromise.”
But, Mises said, “I could be effective only if I presented the situation truthfully as I saw it.” He concludes, “as I look back today…, I regret only my willingness to compromise, not my intransigence.”
Sez You:
I am very familiar with the content of your post.
Thank you for the review. I read a great deal of Mises, Rothbard and Hayek.
Kinda lost interest in recent times having concluded that the world envisioned by these stalwarts would never EVER arrive.
One of Rothbard’s tomes was Power and Market. Sadly power will trump markets until human nature changes which is never.
I can’t get anyone here to describe conservatism to my satisfaction. Or anyone else at any other supposedly conservative site.
I guess “conservative” simply means, “not liberal”, whatever the hell THAT means.
Btw, I am all in favor of communism if I get to be Stalin.
It’s why I left it off the definitions. Conservatism is a coalition almost as disparate as are the above. The only practical definition IMHO is ‘fatally compromised libertarianism with all of the rest’. In a four quadrant box representing two axes of economic and civil liberty where communism is the diagonal opposite of libertarianism and communism is flanked by socialism and fascism, conservatism would be an large amorphous blob dead center and overlapping all and the LPC would be the same centered closer to communism and the NDP, closer still. The only place more lonely than the deep communists would be the libertarians, you know, the “whackos” who wrote the US Constitution.
Thank God I’m old enough. Because today’s high-school/univ generation will finish what Dems/Liberals started. Aka completely destroy N America. I’ve seen what’s trending in young generation: Socialism, St Greta stuff, and gender/race/Islamophobia-combat crap. And if any of ’em are against the grain, they are automatically deemed extreme/alt-right, something-phobes, climate-change deniers etc.
DanC:
All true. Read today that UK has determined that people who read 1984 and Brave New World are right wing extremists.
They don’t know what Socialism is. They think it means the ability to free-ride off of non-socialists.
Except in real socialism, there are no non-socialists (left,) except for the one in 250,000 people who can manage a grift of some kind.
You can take my word for it. I lived in East Germany.
Young people have spent most of their lives living in a pseudo-socialist system – all their needs being taken care of by parents. So it’s only natural that they might think that’s the best economic system.
In theory.
Sounds so fair.
What they haven’t learned is what life is like in actual socialist societies, and that history demonstrates that you can vote your way into socialism, but you almost always have to shoot your way out.
Sadly DM, so have their parents. The government absorbs most of the economy and monopolizes control of the big things, leaving an infantilized nation afraid of thinking, rather have “mommy government” do it.
That and the Scottish mindset pervades. More interested in their neighbour’s failure than their own success. Less pressure that way. We deserve the fate which awaits us.
Peter, what I meant was a family is a sort of socialist system for the kids. Mom and Dad supply all their needs. So naturally at age 16 they are submersed in a socialist lifestyle.
Their parents were too at that age, so is everyone. In the past, logical people decided that people should be adults with adult responsibilities in order to make responsible voting choices, so no votes for kids.
I know, DM, I just offer that for the last 50 years, everyone has been immersed in socialism, starting with medicare.
None of the people who support socialism could define it. I have yet to meet anyone who tells me they like socialism that can define it.
Most think its about kindness, and tolerance and diversity, and helping the poor. And free stuff.
The most common perspectives of socialism among the group were “government providing more services like healthcare, education and daycare” (67%), and “the government guaranteeing a certain level of income for all citizens” (59%).
On the other hand, look what we gave them.
A country where young people will -NEVER- own a house unless Mom and Dad buy it for them.
A country where everything you buy is made somewhere else, and every job you try to get is being done for peanuts by a foreigner. See any white house painters lately? No you haven’t.
A country where farmers are told not to farm, builders are told not to build, and everybody is called a racist.
A country where if you do by a miracle land some cruddy job in some cruddy company, the government takes half your wages one way or another.
So yeah, no doubt they’d like some of that free stuff. It’s the only stuff they think they’re going to get. They’ve been told all good comes from government since they were in nursery school, it is not a surprise they believe it.
The fun part is going to happen when even oblivious young stoners in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver can’t ignore that they’ve been lied to their whole lives, because they’re don’t have food and they don’t have a house, and even Mom and Dad don’t have a house. That could get spicy.
That is about five years out at the current rate of acceleration. Coming soon to a city near you.
Dont worry Phantom – Bill S-233 – UBI will be law sooner rather than later – and all will be well!
S-233 sounds like a Soviet cruise missile. Will probably do -much- more damage.
VERY WELL SAID, The Phantom.
I chuckled (rather than weep) reading about the “just transition” plan to 2050. The plan includes a special agency performing reviews of progress every 5 years and of course knob twirling adjustments.
So, we are entering the era of The Five Year Plan. If the yutes had any knowledge of history they’d be thinking ‘uh oh’.
You nailed it. Just wait till they have to pay for it!
Fun times to be had.
Why wouldn’t they? Where would they get such an idea and what would they hear to have them think differently?
When canada is no longer using coal, oil and gas to run the country, eating will be the least of their problems from Oct to May. Good luck a holes.
IAM TIRED OF SAYING IT, CANADIANS ARE STUPID, YOUNG OR OLD APPARENTLY.
The USA isn’t far behind.
The joke’s on them. We already mortgaged their future.
https://www.debt.ca/debt-clock
An additional irony.
Those promises of “Free Stuff” all come with conditions.
You will get your “free Medical Treatment” some time..maybe,,are you dead yet?
Well we cannot help you with that illness,but we can end your life..
So sure the kiddies all want “Free Stuff” but even they should be able to sense the track record of the promisers.
Worthless Words,is all they are ever going to deliver.
Re: “Many young Canadians felt socialism was defined as receiving more from the government.”
This kind of sums it up neatly. I’m old enough I likely won’t be around to laugh when it all comes crashing down. Reality really is a bitch.
If you asked each of these turds if their classmates who got 85% or higher should give some of their grade marks to the lazy/stupid kids (sub 55%ers) I wonder what their answer would be?
And then I wonder how they’d feel if the class forced them to do it?
Or, if they’re working types, if they should give a portion of every after-tax pay cheque to people who make less, I wonder what their answer would be?
And then I wonder how they’d feel if a stranger forced them to do it.
I know someone who, once they started making good coin – not great, just good – started giving to a charity. Every month now for nearly 25 years. And they even added two other lesser charitable donations per month for at least the last 5 years. I wonder what these ignorant turds would think of that dude?
(Per capita in Canada by province, K-becers give the least to charity. Albertans the most. Surprised?)
An ignorant populace is doomed to be poor and miserable.
Fck Canadians and their pathetic “education” system.
What a disgrace.
Socialism means never having to say you’re sore.