One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Trump Promises BLOODBATH if he is not Elected
Page <<first <prev 30 of 74 next> last>>
Mar 18, 2024 19:52:26   #
Oldsailor65 Loc: Iowa
 
Knightlady wrote:
He was discussing the auto industry regarding EVs being shipped to Mexico from China to get lower tariffs and Trump stated he would put 100% tariff on them if elected and if not, it would be a bloodbath for the auto industry.


Yes that is exactly what Trump said and ment but the stupid liberals aint smart nuf to realize or accept it.

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 19:57:30   #
albertk
 
youngwilliam wrote:
Yep, libertards are manly men.


🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🎯

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:08:37   #
TJKMO Loc: Bicycle Heaven
 
Gatsby wrote:
From "promising" a blood bath, to "predicting" a blood bath, You made a very big jump there,

and landed on your face again.
From "promising" a blood bath, to "... (show quote)



Not with BLOOD being spilled in his name happened on J6.

He said ‘I knew you all PLANNING on marching to the Capitol.
His prediction came true based on his words.
He did not tell them to “stand down” and thank them for coming.

The only thing he got WRONG was his own behavior.
He said he would JOIN them.
He ran home instead.

Then he did not give even one person a pardon.

Reply
 
 
Mar 18, 2024 20:13:02   #
TJKMO Loc: Bicycle Heaven
 
Knightlady wrote:
He was discussing the auto industry regarding EVs being shipped to Mexico from China to get lower tariffs and Trump stated he would put 100% tariff on them if elected and if not, it would be a bloodbath for the auto industry.


That is not what he said.
He never finished the object of where the BLOODBATH would occur.
And he also said “entire country” at the end.

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:13:55   #
TJKMO Loc: Bicycle Heaven
 
Oldsailor65 wrote:
Yes that is exactly what Trump said and ment but the stupid liberals aint smart nuf to realize or accept it.
Yes that is exactly what Trump said and ment but t... (show quote)


That is not what he said.
I posted below what occurred.

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:15:31   #
Mogon
 
EmilyD wrote:
Trump is way above you....he has played you lefties like a fiddle, and you don't even realize it! Lol!!!

....


Grand Symphony Performance!!

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:16:39   #
TJKMO Loc: Bicycle Heaven
 
youngwilliam wrote:
Never. America first.

Satan's not gonna be happy with you. Watch your back.


Are you THREATENING ME?
I renounced satanism.

You said you would do the same with MAGA.

ARE YOU A LIAR?

Reply
 
 
Mar 18, 2024 20:17:02   #
Mogon
 
TJKMO wrote:
What does that mean?
ELWNJ?
I looked it up several times.
But I couldn’t get any results.


Means the same thing as TJKMO!
Not a compliment!!

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:23:17   #
Justice101
 
TJKMO wrote:
Who did he vote for?

A lot of Conservatives wound up crying in court when they were sentenced for their J6 criminal activity.


Will you cry if the Supreme Court finds that the law of "obstructing an official proceeding' that was used against hundreds of J6ers and Trump was Misused in convicting around 200 people by the prosecutors and most of the DC Federal Judges?

It would directly affect 2 of the 4 charges that Jack Smith brought against Trump.

The ‘Sleeping Giant’ Case that Could Upend Jack Smith’s Prosecution of Trump
The Supreme Court has agreed to consider a case that doesn’t mention the former president, but that could invalidate half of the Jan. 6 charges against him.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/01/17/supreme-court-case-trump-prosecution-00135852

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-agrees-hear-jan-6-cases-affect-trump-prosecution-rcna128202

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:24:42   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
You apparently remain ignorant of the historic fact that no amount of social programs have ever resulted in communism. That has invariably been the eventual result of uncontrolled capitalism like we have had over the last 55 years. And exactly what the repblicans want to continue with their greed. You really need to stop lying. The USSR, N. Korea, China, N. Vitnam, Cuba, and Camboia ALL wound up as communist countries after a history of almost exactly what has been happening to Amnerica for the last 55 years. The rich getting richer and the working poor getting poorer until the poor revolted, killed the rich, and initiated communistic government. Greed of the wealthy always causes communism, not socialism. You are deliberately making false statments.
You apparently remain ignorant of the historic fac... (show quote)




Unpopular opinion: Capitalism is a better ideology than socialism or communism because greed is a more tolerable emotion than fear/envy
I'm someone who typically leans on the left of center on political spectrum but today, I realized something intrinsic to human nature and its emotions that made me consider shifting my compass towards right of center (capitalism).
The core thought process here is asking yourself this fundamental question of which human emotion or tendency gives rise to these ideologies.
Capitalism is primarily driven by human greed, be it the greed to put tasty food on your table or better your living standard by getting a new equipment or acquire more stocks in some limited company. Greed for more resources is the motivation here.

On the other hand, the Communist and Socialist ideologies are primarily driven by much darker emotions of fear and envy. The envy is that the "rich capitalist" has a lot more resources than I have, and/or the fear is that the wealth inequality may increase even more due to inflation and my resources will naturally decline over the due course of time.
Despite the world being an unfair place and such fears even having some validation in economic data, I want to still insist that even though both emotions are roughly in the same realm of darkness (and beneath the realm of positive spiritual emotions like love and compassion), greed is way more preferable than fear/envy.
We can understand this with the help of an often used analogy of Would you rather your Foe be an X or Y?:
If you're lost in a forest, would you rather be chased by a Lion or a Cheetah?
I remember reading this anecdote or puzzle many years ago somewhere. Most people would answer Cheetah here as it would seem a less ferocious animal than Lion. However, when you consider that Cheetah can climb trees while Lions can't, you might reconsider that answer as you might get lucky if there is a tree around which you can use to climb and save yourself. However, what really makes Cheetah more ferocious is that it kills just for survival. Cheetah doesn't care if it's hungry or not, it sees you as a threat to be eliminated just due to some innate tendency (fear?). On the other hand, a Lion is more likely to kill you only if it's hungry (greed for meals?).

Would you rather your foe be a ruthless capitalist or a ruthless communist?
A ruthless capitalist is the Lion in above example. They might come after you but only if the cost-benefit analysis of coming after you makes sense and they materially gain something like money, wealth, data, etc. But a ruthless communist, on the other hand, would come after you regardless and blinded by the ideology just because you own more resources (or fall in a higher income strata than them). A ruthless communist will always try to shame you while reminding you of your "privileges" regardless of who you are because their ideology is powered by fear.
If we talk about religious ideologies like Christian Supremacy, Zionism, Islamist, Hindutva, etc, they also roughly fall in this same category as Communist/Socialist, they're also primarily driven by fear. As you climb up the wealth ladder, the fear of blaspheming your religious doctrine declines and the fear of losing the already acquired wealth increases - which is very much a positive fear because this fear doesn't harm anyone, it merely seeks to preserve and protect.
We know there is massive wealth inequality in this world, it isn't just or fair in any manner. But the way towards betterment is using the path of higher emotions like love, compassion and even positive greed and not the darker emotions of fear and envy.
https://tildes.net/~talk/1dhk/unpopular_opinion_capitalism_is_a_better_ideology_than_socialism_or_communism_because_greed_is_a

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:25:51   #
kittibob
 
Rose42 wrote:
I wonder why some of you people don’t think beyond silly propaganda

He didn’t say there would be blood - thats you being dishonest again. What he most likely meant was the other definition of bloodbath - ‘substantial losses by many people, as in mass termination of employment or widespread financial loss’.

Good grief, what is wrong with some of you?


Good Grief, nothing. If Trump says "bloodbath" he means it literally. Trump is not smart enough to use hyperbole, or to understand what it is.

Reply
 
 
Mar 18, 2024 20:30:05   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
[quote=America 1]Unpopular opinion: Capitalism is a better ideology than socialism or communism because greed is a more tolerable emotion than fear/envy


Economic Systems: Capitalism, Communism, and Socialism
An economic system consists of the institutions and the method by which resources are allocated and products and services are distributed. Economic systems differ primarily in who owns the factors of production, how the allocation of resources is directed and the method used to direct economic activity. The primary distinction between the different systems is the degree to which the government participates in the economy.

Communism
Communism, also known as a command system, is an economic system where the government owns most of the factors of production and decides the allocation of resources and what products and services will be provided.

The most important originators of communist doctrine were Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. Like the socialists before them, they wanted to end the exploitation of the masses by the few. The capitalist system at that time required workers to work under harsh and dangerous conditions for little pay. The end goal of communism was to eliminate class distinctions among people, where everyone shared equally in the proceeds of society, when government would no longer be needed.

Karl Marx agreed with Louis Blanc in how labor and income should be managed: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." However, it seems clear from history that Adam Smith had the correct principle, which is that people work in their own self-interest.

Marx and Engels believed there was a class struggle between the masses, which Marx called the proletariat, who could only offer their labor, and the owners of the means of production, which included land, raw materials, tools and machines, and especially money. Karl Marx called the ruling class the bourgeoisie. He believed that a political revolution was essential because the state was a central instrument of capitalist society, and since the bourgeoisie had a stranglehold on the government, it would be necessary to use force and violence to overthrow the capitalists.

Although Marx and Engels believed that property should belong to society, they did not really give much thought to how economic decisions would be made. Communist countries, particularly Russia and China, decided on a centrally planned economy (aka command economy). The centrally planned economy had the following major attributes:

The government owns all means of production, which is managed by employees of the state.
These employees operate under party-appointed economic planners, who set output targets and prices and frequently interfered with the operations to satisfy personal or party desires.
And because communist economies are not efficient and because of the Communist Party's desire to retain power, most economic resources were devoted to industrialization and to the military, depriving consumers of food and other necessary products, causing intense competition for these limited necessities, where many people had to wait in long lines for common consumer goods, such as toilet paper.
Another major feature of communist economies was their emphasis on the country's self-reliance, discouraging international trade and investment.

Major decisions were made by the highest-ranking members of the Communist Party, which, in the Soviet Union, was the Politburo. The Politburo frequently met with the Central Committee that consisted of the heads of the local Communist Party factions and government ministries, the military, police, and other major participants in the economy.

Although the purpose of communism was to serve the needs of the proletariat, communist governments simply became repressive regimes that exploited their people to aggrandize their own power, exploiting the masses even more so than the capitalists.

Capitalism
As long ago as 1776, the Scottish philosopher Adam Smith set down many of the main principles of capitalism in his now classic book An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.

Under capitalism (aka market system), each individual or business works in its own interest and maximizes its own profit based on its decisions. A market economy is one where the allocation of resources and the trading of goods and services are through the decentralized decisions of many firms and households. The equilibrium between supply and demand determines prices, which determines economic output, which, in turn, determines the allocation of resources.

The market system fosters competition that generally produces the most efficient allocation of resources. In pure capitalism, also known as laissez-faire capitalism, the government's role is restricted to providing and enforcing the rules of law by which the economy operates, but it does not interfere with the market. (Laissez-faire means "let it be.")

The essential characteristics of capitalism are that:

the factors of production are privately owned;
economic transactions take place in markets, where buyers and sellers interact;
businesses and employees are free to pursue their own self-interest and are motivated to do so by the potential to earn a profit;
Because consumers are free to buy what they want, the competition for their funds will require businesses to satisfy their needs, or else they will cease to exist due to lack of sales. This consumer sovereignty is what effects the efficient allocation of resources.

The main purpose of the government in regard to the economy is to promote free markets, keep inflation low and steady, protect the rights of private property, and to guarantee contracts, which are necessary to conduct business.

The main benefit of capitalism is the promotion of competition. Although capitalism is usually described as a private ownership of resources, it is competition that provides the main benefit to society; the private ownership of resources is necessary, but not sufficient, for competition. In laissez-faire capitalism, businesses become free to form monopolies or oligopolies, which reduces competition, and thereby reduces the advantages of capitalism. Instead, a plutocracy is created, where the wealthy rule the economy for their own benefit.
Socialism
The definition of socialism varies widely, and many people use it synonymously for communism, but it is often distinguished as an economic system between communism and capitalism. Socialism is the social and economic doctrine that espouses public over private ownership and control of property and natural resources. Socialists argue that since everyone contributes to society in the form of work, therefore everyone should benefit from it. The degree of ownership or control differs among socialists. Some believe that the government should own most of the property and natural resources, while others believe that small businesses should be owned privately. Still others, mainly the rich, believe that simply taxing the rich more is a form of socialism.

Like communism, socialism seeks to redistribute the wealth more equitably by the communal ownership of natural resources and major industries, such as banking and public utilities. Socialists also seek to nationalize monopolies, which greatly enrich their owners at the expense of the people. However, unlike communism, most small or nonessential enterprises would remain privately owned. Also unlike the Communists, most socialists do not advocate violence or force to achieve their economic system.

Early socialist ideas centered on common ownership or control, equality, and the simple life. Some socialists advocated violence as a means of achieving their ends, but later socialists developed policies that envisioned a nonviolent means of achieving socialism. They wanted to revise Marx's teachings, by advocating that socialist successes could be achieved through the ballot box gradually, without violent revolution, and this was often accomplished by using political parties, such as the Labor Party of Great Britain. Thus, various forms of socialist ideals have developed. Some sample subtypes of socialist systems include the following:

Guild socialism was based on the medieval guild, where an association of craftsman or other people of similar skills determine their own working conditions and activities. Some of these Guild socialists thought that there should be a government that coordinated the activity of the different guilds while others thought that the state should be limited to providing protection.
Fabian socialism emphasized winning small battles over pitched battles. The Fabian society was named after the Roman general Fabius Cunctator, who wore down Hannibal's armies through minor skirmishes rather than major battles. They advocated the social control of property by an impartial administration of enlightened experts.
The Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) was formed in 1875 and exerted significant influence on German politics. A prominent revisionist of Marxism was Édouard Bernstein who lived in England for a while to escape the harassment of Otto von Bismarck, who, as Chancellor of Germany, tried to suppress the socialists and the SPD party in particular. While in England, Bernstein learned about the Fabians, and that laborers were achieving some success through trade unions. Since it was becoming clear that the conditions of the working class were improving rather than deteriorating, which was the opposite of what Karl Marx predicted, then improving working conditions and compensation may be better achieved through unionization and politics.
However, political strategies and unionization were not viable methods in countries like Russia, which was under authoritarian rule by the czars. Therefore, VI Lenin, who led the Bolshevik party of the Russian Social-Democratic Workers Party, realized that violence would probably be necessary to achieve socialism.

Lenin believed, as he argued in his book What is to be Done? (1902), that workers would only fight for better wages and working conditions, if they were led by a vanguard party of professional revolutionaries. The severe plight of the Russian people during World War I allowed the Bolsheviks to overcome the czarist regime and establish control. Thus, revolutionary Marxism was given a boost, which would be later used by other groups to gain control of their governments. Revolutionary Marxism eventually became known as Marxism-Leninism.

Some have advocated a market socialism: blending a free market economy with social ownership and control of property, where businesses would still compete for profit, but would be owned or at least be controlled by their laborers. The workers would choose their supervisors and managers, control the working conditions, set prices for the products and services, and decide how profits and losses will be shared.

Socialism in the modern world has yielded to the 3rd way, a center-left position committed to the socialists' objective of equality and welfare for the masses, but abandoning class-based politics and public ownership of production. Tony Blair of the British Labour Party promoted this 3rd way in 1995. Two years later, the Labour Party won a large victory, and Tony Blair served as prime minister for 2 terms.

Economic Systems of the Future
History has amply demonstrated that communism and socialism retard the growth of economies, because there is no competition between businesses, and the people who manage such businesses are often political appointees, chosen more for their social and political connections than for their understanding of the businesses that they manage. Furthermore, large industries are often under the control of many bureaucrats, who often issue conflicting demands. They care little about whether society wants their product or service, and do not care as much about costs, since these costs are paid by the government.

To illustrate how inefficient communism is compared to capitalism, consider the difference between the 2016 Gross Domestic Products of Germany and Russia:
2016 GDP
Germany
$3,477,796,000,000
Russia
$1,283,163,000,000
Russia is, by far, the largest country in the world, with a landmass slightly exceeding 6,600,000 mi.², and natural resources proportional to its landmass. It also has a population of 144,370,000. By contrast, Germany's land area is 137,879 mi.², with a population of 83,249,000. And despite Russia having a landmass almost 48 times that of Germany, with proportionally greater natural resources, and a much larger population, Germany's GDP in 2016 was 2.7 times that of Russia! Although Russia is a major military power, it is an economic midget: it achieves its military prowess by devoting a much larger percentage of its GDP to military spending, which is why most of the people in Russia live in relative poverty. Other small countries with a GDP larger than Russia include: Japan, United Kingdom, France, Italy, and even South Korea.

Or consider the difference between North and South Korea:
The Stark Contrast Between the Lights of Civilization and the Darkness of Poverty
As can be easily seen from this 2014 nighttime photograph from the space station, the lights of civilization are conspicuous in South Korea and China, but virtually absent from North Korea. The contrast is especially stark along the border separating North and South Korea. Indeed, most of North Korea looks like the ocean at night.

Of course, this stark contrast doesn't simply result from the difference between pure communism and pure capitalism, for such systems are nonexistent. The poverty in North Korea is created by their political leaders using the very limited resources of North Korea to help their leaders maintain political power. Kim Jong-un is diverting considerable resources to the production and testing of nuclear weapons and missiles to carry them, to develop the capability of destroying the United States that will serve as a deterrent to any attempt to topple his regime. That his people are suffering because of this massive diversion evidently does not faze him. Or, he may be seeking to use nuclear weapons to blackmail the rest the world, especially the United States. After all, after he develops hydrogen bombs and the missiles to carry them, what else can he do with them? His economy will still be in shambles, and since communist economies generally don't do well without, at least, some degree of freedom, it will probably be the only means of improving the lot of his people.
More:
https://thismatter.com/economics/economic-systems.htm

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:30:19   #
Knightlady
 
kittibob wrote:
Good Grief, nothing. If Trump says "bloodbath" he means it literally. Trump is not smart enough to use hyperbole, or to understand what it is.


Oh pleez

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:31:41   #
TJKMO Loc: Bicycle Heaven
 
Knightlady wrote:
He was discussing the auto industry regarding EVs being shipped to Mexico from China to get lower tariffs and Trump stated he would put 100% tariff on them if elected and if not, it would be a bloodbath for the auto industry.


That is not what he said.
You created “ Auto Industry” out of whole cloth and he mentioned the entire country at the end.

Reply
Mar 18, 2024 20:32:09   #
Ranger7374 Loc: Arizona, 40 miles from the border in the DMZ
 
billlingle wrote:
The media simply repeated what the Fat Boy said. You and he can spin it any way that you wish. The fact remains. If the Fat Loser didn't want the statement about a bloodbath printed and repeated millions of times he would not have said it. He mentioned the auto industry to give guys like you some gibberish to hang on to while you are trying to convince yourselves that it was said innocently rather than immediately concluding that he is the creep in the wings with a plan to make himself believe that what his fantasy tells him about himself is actually true.
The media simply repeated what the Fat Boy said. ... (show quote)


The media reacted to the word, "bloodbath" ignoring the context. So would it have been better if he said, "hostile take over by the Chinese in American auto industry"? Bloodbath is simpler and gets to the point.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 30 of 74 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.