Keeping Prespective

But America DID have all the gold after WW11 ...

America had become THE world superpower and amassed unprecedented wealth and was having a tremendous economic boom.

Are you trying to say that all of this was as a result of left wing / socialist political policies ?

IMO it was a result of the times, not political policies.

The U.K. is evidence of that, we had a social ‘labour‘ government post war, and the country was broke, broke beyond belief, but it was a result of the times, not political policies.
There you go with the socialism crap again. The prosperity in the USA of the post-WWII era was due to EVERYONE agreeing that the people who fought the war and kicked Hitler's ass and survived were deserving of good-paying jobs for hard work and productivity, It wasn't until the Reagan era when working people began being treated more and more as commodities to be manipulated in the ever-accelerating race to the bottom competition between the 1%ers to have more gold than Croesus.

And I would argue that the war, as well as the resulting economic conditions worldwide were the direct result of political policies on both sides, not the "times" whatever that means.
 
How the USA can spend billions on "spreading democracy" in every war since WWII and cite "nation building" while calling every program ever invented to help it's own citizens "socialism" is the height of fascist hypocrisy.
 
The trouble with the argument about wealth distribution is it loses sight of the absolute value of wealth.

Meaning, I would hope that no one would argue that the bottom 50% has the same wealth as they did in the 1920’s!

The filthy rich have always been filthy rich (think English stately homes) and they always will be. I’m not defending it, but I don’t think focusing on it is healthy.

I think it’s far more realistic to focus on the absolute wealth of the masses which, frankly, has increased to levels that the working classes in the ‘20s could not possibly have dreamed of !
 
There you go with the socialism crap again. The prosperity in the USA of the post-WWII era was due to EVERYONE agreeing that the people who fought the war and kicked Hitler's ass and survived were deserving of good-paying jobs for hard work and productivity, It wasn't until the Reagan era when working people began being treated more and more as commodities to be manipulated in the ever-accelerating race to the bottom competition between the 1%ers to have more gold than Croesus.

And I would argue that the war, as well as the resulting economic conditions worldwide were the direct result of political policies on both sides, not the "times" whatever that means.
I’m honestly not sure what your point is as it seems we agree?!

I incorrectly thought you were attributing post WW2 US boom to socialist policies, so apologies for that, as, like you, I’m simply saying it was a result of the war and associated topics and was not down to left or right wing policies.

Das ist alas!
 
Wealth of "the masses" increased steadily from the Great Depression (caused by 1%ers manipulating business and laws to produce profit without a product) until the 80's when money fascism became acceptable and fashionable. The downturn and near-ruination of the world economy in 2008 is another example of money-grubbers gone wild. While Reagan was decrying "welfare mothers" and touting "free markets" fascism crept in and has been present here ever since. Let's not forget Hitler was duly elected. Once.
 
Wealth of "the masses" increased steadily from the Great Depression (caused by 1%ers manipulating business and laws to produce profit without a product) until the 80's when money fascism became acceptable and fashionable. The downturn and near-ruination of the world economy in 2008 is another example of money-grubbers gone wild. While Reagan was decrying "welfare mothers" and touting "free markets" fascism crept in and has been present here ever since. Let's not forget Hitler was duly elected. Once.
There is disagreement on what caused the Great Depression. I will go with Milton Friedman on this one.

Friedman Follows the Facts​

In the 1950s, Friedman and Anna Schwartz began compiling historical data on monetary variables without any particular agenda or intention of overturning the dominant explanation of the Great Depression. But it became obvious that the data were at odds with the standard Keynesian explanation. So in their 1963 book, A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960, they presented the empirical evidence that led them to a completely different explanation.

As a result of examining more closely the key years between 1929 and 1933, Friedman and Schwartz first concluded that the Great Depression was not the necessary and direct result of the stock-market crash of October 1929, which they attribute to a speculative investment bubble. (The popping of the “bubble” may have been instigated by the Federal Reserve’s raising of the discount rate—the interest rate the Fed charges on loans to commercial banks—in August 1929. The cause of the speculative bubble that led to the crash is a somewhat controversial topic. Whereas Friedman and Schwartz accepted that the bubble was caused by investors, seemingly endorsing—at least partly—the Keynesian “animal spirits” explanation, Austrian economists have argued otherwise.) In fact, they believed that the economy could have recovered rather rapidly if only the Fed—the central bank of the United States —had not engaged in a series of disastrous policies in the aftermath of the crash.

 
Wealth of "the masses" increased steadily from the Great Depression (caused by 1%ers manipulating business and laws to produce profit without a product) until the 80's when money fascism became acceptable and fashionable. The downturn and near-ruination of the world economy in 2008 is another example of money-grubbers gone wild. While Reagan was decrying "welfare mothers" and touting "free markets" fascism crept in and has been present here ever since. Let's not forget Hitler was duly elected. Once.
When you have to use Hilter as a comparison to another person, you do not have facts on your side.
If you have facts to present, do so.
Reagan managed the greatest economic growth and employment growth ever.
Please cite some examples of "Fascism"

Just because you have a Pen and a Phone, it does not make you a Fascist.

Definition of fascism​


1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Violence

Fascists reacted to their opponents with physical force. Primo de Rivera maintained that “no other argument is admissible than that of fists and pistols when justice or the Fatherland is attacked.” Before he came to power, Mussolini sent his Blackshirts to assault socialist organizers throughout Italy, and later he sent many leftists to prison. Hitler’s Storm Troopers served a similar function, and Nazi concentration camps at first interned more Marxists than Jews. Nor were dissident conservatives spared Nazi violence. Hitler’s infamous “Blood Purge” of June 1934, in which Röhm and other SA leaders were summarily executed, also claimed the lives of Kurt von Schleicher, the last chancellor of the Weimar Republic, and his wife, who were murdered in their home. To his critics Hitler replied, “People accuse us of being barbarians; we are barbarians, and we are proud of it!” In Romania, Codreanu’s “death teams” engaged in brutal strikebreaking, and, in France, Drieu La Rochelle glorified military and political violence as healthy antidotes to decadence. Beginning in 1931 Japanese fascists assassinated a number of important political figures, but in 1936, after a government crackdown, they renounced such tactics. In the United States in the 1920s and ’30s, the Ku Klux Klan and other groups sought to intimidate African Americans with cross burnings, beatings, and lynchings

 
Fascism and Communism are the same deal - authoritarianism. They both have their origins in the same philosophy -the individual is subservient to the state. In a democracy, the individual IS the state - we serve ourselves. America's success during WW2 was not achieved through coercion. The main reason the west won was we had industrial democracy. The workforce were volunteers , not resentful slaves. In Australia, John Howard invented Workchoices, which resulted in casualisation of the workforce and a coerced industrial scene - also wage theft... It is simply the fascist approach - you have no choice but to obey orders.
All governments in democracies are socialist and also in dictatorships. The government works for the good of the citizens - just the mindset is different. In any given situation, there must always be a balance between democracy and control. You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. Personally, I don't like being exploited when I have no choice. The carrot is always better than the stick ?
 
Last edited:
America's success during WW2 was not achieved through coercion. The main reason the west won was we had industrial democracy. The workforce were volunteers , not resentful slaves.
Industrial democracy is an arrangement which involves workers making decisions, sharing responsibility and authority in the workplace.

In the US it was not an industrial Democracy, it was capitalism. The workers were not volunteers, they were employees.

The Govt did control the workers, limiting their wages, as well as the ability to negotiate their wages.

this is where Paid healthcare was invented.
Henry Kaiser was building Liberty ships, (Freighters) as fast as 1 in 24 hours (done in a race with 2 teams)
He needed more workers, but could not pay any more than other industries, limited by the Govt.
So he offered, healthcare in the pay package, it had not been done before so no Govt regs against it.
Perhaps you have heard of Kaiser Permanente, it is still around.
 
The trouble with the argument about wealth distribution is it loses sight of the absolute value of wealth.

Meaning, I would hope that no one would argue that the bottom 50% has the same wealth as they did in the 1920’s!

The filthy rich have always been filthy rich (think English stately homes) and they always will be. I’m not defending it, but I don’t think focusing on it is healthy.

I think it’s far more realistic to focus on the absolute wealth of the masses which, frankly, has increased to levels that the working classes in the ‘20s could not possibly have dreamed of !

Saw this today. Reich is ex-US Secretary of Labor
1605558664350.png
 
A long watch, but very interesting. The roots and effects of Reagan and Thatcher neoliberal policies.

 
All very interesting .... exactly how does it affect a small town retired guy in Nova Scotia ..... have lived and worked here my entire life .... started in the woods after finishing 2yr diploma as Eng. Tech. , worked my way up to Superintendent of Public works for small town ..... have lived through several different gov’s both Federal and Provincial and just can’t point to any instance where these Admins. affected me , good or bad ... have I lived the last 65+ years with head in the sand ..... or am I just a dumb ass .. ...
 
Saw this today. Reich is ex-US Secretary of Labor
View attachment 19847
Ta-daaa! Just because someone's a fascist doesn't mean they can control or enact every authoritarian position they obviously believe in, such as voter supression and intimidation, oligarchy, and outright lying propaganda that becomes accepted as 'truth' by their deluded followers. Hitler WAS elected.
 
The stock market crash didn't cause the great depression.
The Civil War wasn't about slavery.
The Holocaust never happened.
We've never had any fascist politicians come to power in the USA.
Kim Jong Fathead ain't so bad.

Oh, I almost forgot; Coronavirus is a hoax. I included this because I read an article in which an ER nurse said she hears this from patients dying of Covid-19. They would know, right?
 
Last edited:
The stock market crash didn't cause the great depression.
The Civil War wasn't about slavery.
The Holocaust never happened.
We've never had any fascist politicians come to power in the USA.
Kim Jong Fathead ain't so bad.

Oh, I almost forgot; Coronavirus is a hoax. I included this because I read an article in which an ER nurse said she hears this from patients dying of Covid-19. They would know, right?
" even though every independent fact checker said President Trump DID NOT call the coronavirus a hoax,”
 
" even though every independent fact checker said President Trump DID NOT call the coronavirus a hoax,”
Semantics, man. Someone has convinced them that it is, and it wasn't us libtards.

"Their last dying words are 'this can't be happening, it's not real,'" Doering said, adding that some patients prefer to believe that they have pneumonia or other diseases rather than Covid-19, despite seeing their positive test results.

 
Semantics, man. Someone has convinced them that it is, and it wasn't us libtards.

Yes it was you, and many like you.

The media doing anything they can to harm Trump TDS.
The media says it, you hear it, and you propagate it every time you can.
Trump was calling the media a hoax and even said the next day that he was not calling the virus a hoax, did it stop there, nope.

You keep it going, just as you are now, and then deny that you are doing it.

The Russian hoax is just another example, we now know where it started and who knew, I bet you believe, and tell people Trump Colluded with Russia.

The ends do not justify the means.
 
You are a true disciple , which is, of course your choice ! .... as I mentioned earlier ,no Admin. in my home Country has had any noticeable affect on my life , much less south of the border ! .... as long as you folks keep your rampant Covid down there .... no ill will meant, just way past time some one down there decided to take the spread of Covid seriously ... for the good of your own people and rest of world ....
 
Back
Top