In The News

[Corporal Hicks]

Now, I'm curious, why do you come to an AVP forum to solely to push your political views? You're pretty much only active here on the "In The News" board.

Glad it's not just me that's noticed that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35088794

This kind of thing really bothers me.

[whiterabbit]

Wait, so in the UK if the government thinks you can't handle a child they out right take it away from it's mother? The government has that much power over it's people. I mean sure, they're legitimate reasons for doing so but this seems a bit harsh imo.

[Corporal Hicks]

It's not quite as simple as that. It's typically for good reasons (I'm sure they'll be cases of getting it f**ked up) and involves court and judge rulings.

[HuDaFuK]

Wait, so in the UK if the government thinks you can't handle a child they out right take it away from it's mother? The government has that much power over it's people. I mean sure, they're legitimate reasons for doing so but this seems a bit harsh imo.

I think that article is more about an increase in the number of people having kids who really shouldn't be, and are either incapable or just too piss-idle to look after them.

[Corporal Hicks]

I think that article is more about an increase in the number of people having kids who really shouldn't be, and are either incapable or just too piss-idle to look after them.

That's the bit that bothers me.

[DoomRulz]

What do you expect when all economic activity is planned by the state pretty much constitutes a dictatorship as it is? If the government has the power to run your life from A to Z, they're not going to stand for real elections.

No. REAL communism (on paper) is not run by some kind of government but directly by the people. It's anti-elitist and anti-hierarchal in every sense and way. In a way it's not far away from anarchism and similar ideologies. True communism is naive and utopian as it believe that after the revolution, regular people will step in and work together, making sure that everything is fair for everybody and that no one is going to try to cheat their way to wealth or try to influence their way to a position of power.

We all know that it doesn't work because there hasn't been one single communist country/state/nation ever. You have the revolution, sure, but it always ends there. Instead of THE people stepping up and in, opportunists and psychopaths take their place and abuse the people's revolutionary spirit and hopes for the future to cement their own will and power. Communism fails in reality as it has no protection against totalitarian takeovers. It's extremely vulnerable and during and after the revolution phase as it lies open for any self-proclaimed do-gooder representative of the people to have his way with it, which way too often is someone with a military, often criminal, background.

Because in every nation where communist revolutions occurred, poverty was always an issue along with widespread uneducation. If the people don't know a single thing about government and maintaining a social system, it's doomed to collapse if there is no centralised power. In developed nations, capitalism is preferred because people are able to make their own way and rightfully so, don't want to share their spoils with others. Frankly, why should they? They've worked to earn what they have and having the state force them to give it up because someone else doesn't have as much is selfish in my view.

[Hubbs]

Wait, so in the UK if the government thinks you can't handle a child they out right take it away from it's mother? The government has that much power over it's people. I mean sure, they're legitimate reasons for doing so but this seems a bit harsh imo.

I think that article is more about an increase in the number of people having kids who really shouldn't be, and are either incapable or just too piss-idle to look after them.

No surprise at all, just one of many factors that will eventually bring the UK to its knees. But no one wants to believe it, just p*ssing into the wind.

[SpreadEagleBeagle]

What do you expect when all economic activity is planned by the state pretty much constitutes a dictatorship as it is? If the government has the power to run your life from A to Z, they're not going to stand for real elections.

No. REAL communism (on paper) is not run by some kind of government but directly by the people. It's anti-elitist and anti-hierarchal in every sense and way. In a way it's not far away from anarchism and similar ideologies. True communism is naive and utopian as it believe that after the revolution, regular people will step in and work together, making sure that everything is fair for everybody and that no one is going to try to cheat their way to wealth or try to influence their way to a position of power.

We all know that it doesn't work because there hasn't been one single communist country/state/nation ever. You have the revolution, sure, but it always ends there. Instead of THE people stepping up and in, opportunists and psychopaths take their place and abuse the people's revolutionary spirit and hopes for the future to cement their own will and power. Communism fails in reality as it has no protection against totalitarian takeovers. It's extremely vulnerable and during and after the revolution phase as it lies open for any self-proclaimed do-gooder representative of the people to have his way with it, which way too often is someone with a military, often criminal, background.

Because in every nation where communist revolutions occurred, poverty was always an issue along with widespread uneducation. If the people don't know a single thing about government and maintaining a social system, it's doomed to collapse if there is no centralised power. In developed nations, capitalism is preferred because people are able to make their own way and rightfully so, don't want to share their spoils with others. Frankly, why should they? They've worked to earn what they have and having the state force them to give it up because someone else doesn't have as much is selfish in my view.

I agree with your take on why communism never took root anywhere after the revolutions - the people were uneducated, poor and not used to cooperate and work together on a scale like that without a leader telling them what to do.

Your take on capitalism is extremely simplified and rose-goggled on many accounts. First and foremost these developed nations embraced BOTH socialism and capitalism. Some countries took a more socialist route (Scandinavia and Canada for example), whereas others went on a more capitalist trajectory (the U.S. for example).

Paying taxes is your way to pay back for all the services, infrastructure etc. you use and take for granted. Not paying taxes and feeling that you don't owe anything IS selfish, immature, egoistic and irresponsible. That's greedy and self-centered and skews everything down a dog-eat-dog route of Capitalist dictatorship and fascism. We all work hard, yet some people work three jobs and can barely make it whereas others don't even have to work and can still live in luxury. How is this acceptable, or even worse - defendable? To live in luxury is more important than human dignity?

[The PredBen]

What do you expect when all economic activity is planned by the state pretty much constitutes a dictatorship as it is? If the government has the power to run your life from A to Z, they're not going to stand for real elections.

No. REAL communism (on paper) is not run by some kind of government but directly by the people. It's anti-elitist and anti-hierarchal in every sense and way. In a way it's not far away from anarchism and similar ideologies. True communism is naive and utopian as it believe that after the revolution, regular people will step in and work together, making sure that everything is fair for everybody and that no one is going to try to cheat their way to wealth or try to influence their way to a position of power.

We all know that it doesn't work because there hasn't been one single communist country/state/nation ever. You have the revolution, sure, but it always ends there. Instead of THE people stepping up and in, opportunists and psychopaths take their place and abuse the people's revolutionary spirit and hopes for the future to cement their own will and power. Communism fails in reality as it has no protection against totalitarian takeovers. It's extremely vulnerable and during and after the revolution phase as it lies open for any self-proclaimed do-gooder representative of the people to have his way with it, which way too often is someone with a military, often criminal, background.

Because in every nation where communist revolutions occurred, poverty was always an issue along with widespread uneducation. If the people don't know a single thing about government and maintaining a social system, it's doomed to collapse if there is no centralised power. In developed nations, capitalism is preferred because people are able to make their own way and rightfully so, don't want to share their spoils with others. Frankly, why should they? They've worked to earn what they have and having the state force them to give it up because someone else doesn't have as much is selfish in my view.

By that logic, why should people in Europe share the spoils of their first world nation with third world refugees and migrants? I'm not saying this to you directly, because I have no clue what your stance on the refugee crisis is, but highlighted it as a general point.

[whiterabbit]

I think that article is more about an increase in the number of people having kids who really shouldn't be, and are either incapable or just too piss-idle to look after them.

That's the bit that bothers me.

That is bothersome but the truth is that most European countries already have a near flat birth rate or a contracting population in some cases. So there is motivation for the government to increase the birth rate for economic reasons alone. So those irresponsible people are at least doing something by having kids. Through I read that as the Government just deciding that they know whats better for the children out of purely satirical reasons. Such as not earning enough money or living in a bad neighborhood.

Oh and communism will never work because all people always want more than they can ever be given and those with it all will never ever give that up with out mass murder.

[DoomRulz]

I agree with your take on why communism never took root anywhere after the revolutions - the people were uneducated, poor and not used to cooperate and work together on a scale like that without a leader telling them what to do.

Your take on capitalism is extremely simplified and rose-goggled on many accounts. First and foremost these developed nations embraced BOTH socialism and capitalism. Some countries took a more socialist route (Scandinavia and Canada for example), whereas others went on a more capitalist trajectory (the U.S. for example).

I like a little of socialism. A safety net in the form of a welfare system is needed IMO in any modern, civilized society. I also think there should be checks and balances to ensure the system is not abused by people who seek a free ride in life. I also think higher taxes are a bad thing because it will bite a nation in the ass if it becomes unbearable. Just ask the people of Greece. If you start taxing the rich too much and the nation becomes dependent on their money, then those rich folks are going to leave the country and with them, their money goes too.

We all work hard, yet some people work three jobs and can barely make it whereas others don't even have to work and can still live in luxury.

Tough shit, that's life. You make your own way.

By that logic, why should people in Europe share the spoils of their first world nation with third world refugees and migrants? I'm not saying this to you directly, because I have no clue what your stance on the refugee crisis is, but highlighted it as a general point.

I'm all for helping others as long as the people at home are taken care of as well. We don't elect our leaders to help people in another country across the planet, we elect them to help us. For instance, here in Canada, everyone and their dog is going bonkers for Trudeau bringing in refugees from Syria. Yet he's announced no sort of plan to help the homeless or the poor in society. Not to mention, his refugee plan is horeshit anyway. We'll bring in all the married men, women, and children that we can but tell single, military-aged men they are not welcome because they're a security risk. f**k you, Trudeau. You're supposed to grant people like that freedom, not discriminate against them

[whiterabbit]

Tough shit, that's life. You make your own way.

I never liked the phrase tough shit when used in such context. By that understanding I can slaughter the lot of you and claim; tough shit.

[Deathbearer]

Tough shit, that's life. You make your own way.

I never liked the phrase tough shit when used in such context. By that understanding I can slaughter the lot of you and claim; tough shit.

Don't get cut on all that edge

[DoomRulz]

Tough shit, that's life. You make your own way.

I never liked the phrase tough shit when used in such context. By that understanding I can slaughter the lot of you and claim; tough shit.

Right back at ya, darlin'

[The PredBen]

Tough shit, that's life. You make your own way.

I never liked the phrase tough shit when used in such context. By that understanding I can slaughter the lot of you and claim; tough shit.

Well, yeah, unfortunately. Look, I'm a pretty sympathetic person by nature. I don't personally approve of that whole "survival of the fittest" and "to the victor goes the spoils" mentality. In all honesty, that line of thinking makes my blood boil. But at the end of the day, that DOES seem to be how the world works, and if I want to live in this world, I need to adapt likewise.