Winston Churchill on bailouts

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

nesf

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Not necessarily. Capitalists are in favour of making money, and in an environment like 1920's Europe, fascism offered the best means to do that.

For someone who complains about people's misuse of the word socialist you've a very simplistic and vague view of what capitalism is.

SkepticOne

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

So do Labour.....

Irrelevant. They gassed socialists ffs.

Does it not strike you odd that it is the left who are most opposed to fascism and Nazism?

I think most people are aware that socialists have a tendency to form into factions and fight each other.

eoinbn

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Churchill also proposed the elimination of income tax and the introduction of Land Value Tax, but like all good and fair things, he was blocked by the rich who would lose vast amounts of money and the poor were powerless to do anything.

Or maybe it wasn't used because it's nonsense? Since when does land=automatic wealth? A doctor/barrister/accountant could work out of a piece of land worth €5000 and easily earn a 6 figure salary while a farmer/manufacturer could own €500,000 worth of land and be making little to no money.

OP: The quote is probably out of context. As people have pointed out banks are essential in our social structure. From starting a business to keeping credit follow they are neccessary no matter what we think of them. If the government were taking the unions advise and pumping millions/billions into failed companies like Waterford crystal and SR technics then it would be relevant.

OhNoYouDidn't

So the message from the voodoo economics crowd is that when an avowed right wing dictator with the support of the capitalist classes (why did German industry support this 'socialist' over the others?) rounds up the left and ships them off to the camps he is actually a socialist. It must be great to be as smugly right as you guys.

This is essentially the same as holocaust denial - rewriting Nazi history because it doesnt suit your political beliefs. Your argument is basically "I'm right wing, but people say Hitler was, but he was mean, so I'll claim he is a socialist because I don't like them either".

Sinister.

OhNoYouDidn't

nesf wrote: »

For someone who complains about people's misuse of the word socialist you've a very simplistic and vague view of what capitalism is.

There is a world of difference between capitalism the economic philosophy and the capitalist classes, as the events of the last couple of weeks show.

OhNoYouDidn't

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Dictatorships have similar charachteristics? Get away!

Nazism did not "use the statist methods of socialism". Statism and socialism are not the same thing, and won't become the same thing no matter how often you repeat it.

You remind me of the SWSS student calling everyone to their right a 'fascist'. All state intervention to you is socialist, even when its FF or the Nazis. Lazy, blinkered la la land politics.

OhNoYouDidn't

SkepticOne wrote: »

I think most people are aware that socialists have a tendency to form into factions and fight each other.

This is brilliant I must say.

So the left confronting Nazis is a factional split?

I really worry about what is being taught in schools these days.

Dannyboy83

eoinbn wrote: »

Or maybe it wasn't used because it's nonsense? Since when does land=automatic wealth? A doctor/barrister/accountant could work out of a piece of land worth €5000 and easily earn a 6 figure salary while a farmer/manufacturer could own €500,000 worth of land and be making little to no money.

How did you determine it to be nonsense?
The example you use to disprove it serves only to prove you didn't read it.