Using basic terms incorrectly...

[oggbashan]

So you believe that all government regulation is socialism.

He doesn't know what he believes, or if he does, he has changed his mind several times during this thread.

 

[BotanyBoy]

So you believe that all government regulation is socialism.

No not at at all.

I'm asking a question.

If I take your car from you by force, drive it, use it for my own gain indefinitely, park it at my house and deny you access to it except to maintenance it and deal with the upkeep on it. You don't get a say so in the matter, if you want to even see it you gotta come ask my permission.

Who owns that car??

He doesn't know what he believes, or if he does, he has changed his mind several times during this thread.

Yes I do and not even once.

 

[richard_daily]

No not at at all.

I'm asking a question.

If I take your car from you by force, drive it, use it for my own gain indefinitely, park it at my house and deny you access to it except to maintenance it and deal with the upkeep on it. You don't get a say so in the matter, if you want to even see it you gotta come ask my permission.

Who owns that car??

You say "no not at all", but then you ask a question that implies that you indeed do.

You are not in a situation where that question of "who owns the car" is realistic, reasonable, or in any way an example of what occurs in the real world. You want me to jump through hoops for no real reason, and it's a logical fallacy.

What are you trying to get at with your "who owns that car" analogy? What are you comparing the car to? Spell it out simply and without convoluting things for me...

If you don't think all government regulation is socialism, what do you believe?

 

[BotanyBoy]

You say "no not at all", but then you ask a question that implies that you indeed do.

That is your assumption, not my implication.

You are not in a situation where that question of "who owns the car" is realistic, reasonable, or in any way an example of what occurs in the real world. You want me to jump through hoops for no real reason, and it's a logical fallacy.

It's not a logical fallacy, it's a question.

What are you trying to get at with your "who owns that car" analogy? What are you comparing the car to? Spell it out simply and without convoluting things for me...

I'm not convoluting anything, I'm asking you a question.

If you want to understand where I'm going with it, grow a fuckin' pair and answer the sum' bitchn.

If you don't get to have control over your car do you actually own it?

If you don't think all government regulation is socialism, what do you believe?

I've told you several times.

Asking again won't make me change it to what you wish I was saying and are desperate to ascribe me.

 

[richard_daily]

I've told you several times.

Asking again won't make me change it to what you wish I was saying and are desperate to ascribe me.

You haven't actually told me... you've danced around and made comments that sound to 4 different people like you're advocating that all government control is socialism.

I've asked you to clarify your position, and you want to talk in literal riddles.

I'm not playing that game.

Say what you mean.

 

[oggbashan]

BotanyBoy - you have never made your position on government control and socialism clear. You have waffled around the two subjects, ascribed ideas to others that are unjustified by their posts, and just been an asshole.

Piss off!

 

[BotanyBoy]

You haven't actually told me...

Go read post 296...that was just the most recent, I've told you a few other times too.

You just keep ignoring it and saying "So you think all government regulation is socialism." again...and gain.

you've danced around and made comments that sound to 4 different people like you're advocating that all government control is socialism.

Lot of illiterates in the world....

I've asked you to clarify your position, and you want to talk in literal riddles.

I'm not playing that game.

Say what you mean.

Post 296.



Now back to the question.

If you don't get to have control over your car do you actually own it?

 

[BotanyBoy]

BotanyBoy - you have never made your position on government control and socialism clear. You have waffled around the two subjects, ascribed ideas to others that are unjustified by their posts, and just been an asshole.

Piss off!

Post 296 I clearly state my position.

I've said it more than once.

"I think any political theory that advocates government control over the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods and services is socialism. "

But you keep reading something along the lines of 'If socialism is government then all governments are socialist" and calling it a 4 legged dog fallacy and RD keeps seeing "I think all government regulation is socialism." .

 

[oggbashan]

I think any political theory that advocates government control over the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods and services is socialism.

I think that laws that control the means, are socialist in nature, I think the people and parties who push those laws are socialist. What kind of socialist is just a matter of who's stealing from who and what sales pitch it was sold on.

Go read post 296...that was just the most recent, I've told you a few other times too.

You just keep ignoring it and saying "So you think all government regulation is socialism." again...and gain.

Lot of illiterates in the world....

Post 296.

I have quoted post 296 and your recent one. I have bolded your statements in 296.

Those statements of yours MEAN that all government regulation is socialism.

You are the illiterate one.

 

[richard_daily]

I have quoted post 296 and your recent one. I have bolded your statements in 296.

Those statements of yours MEAN that all government regulation is socialism.

You are the illiterate one.

Sounds like he's having trouble with basic concepts.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I have quoted post 296 and your recent one. I have bolded your statements in 296.

Those statements of yours MEAN that all government regulation is socialism.

Only if you're illiterate enough to ignore this part of what I'm saying.

"over the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods and services "

That means government regulations against murder, rape, theft, vandalism, assault, fraud etc. are NOT socialist.

You are the illiterate one.

LOL...keep telling yourself that.

 

[water505]

Double

 

[BotanyBoy]

Sounds like he's having trouble with basic concepts.

Really?

How is government regulation against murder control over the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods and services then??

Hm????

Or are you just going to worm about that question as well??

 

[water505]

Really?

How is government regulation against murder control over the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods and services then??

Hm????

Or are you just going to worm about that question as well??

He'll deflect your question by asking another question.

 

[oggbashan]

Really?

How is government regulation against murder control over the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods and services then??

Hm????

Or are you just going to worm about that question as well??

No.

They aren't in the definitions of socialism which were quoted from dictionaries earlier in this thread.

We have been discussing socialism. You have been discussing your own nonsense.

 

[Bad_Doggie]

Answer the question....

No you don't....this is government regulation, control and administration buddy.

You better take care of that car, pay for that car and you only get to use the car when and how I approve of or you're going to fucking prison.

Who owns the car??

Except that wasn’t your question was it? Your question was…..

If I take your car from you, drive it, use it for my own gain indefinitely, park it at my house and deny you access to it except to service/maintenance it......who owns that car??

Can’t you keep one fucking thing straight from one post to the next?

Your latest variant is no less ridiculous.

I own a car……what makes you think I can’t do what the fuck I like with it?

The regulation only comes into effect if I want to use it on public roads in this country.

Woof!

 

[Bad_Doggie]

Oh and all this latest distraction seems to preventing proving your nutty theory…
Was that your intent; think I’d forget?

I’m not I’m waiting for you to show us where it says any such thing which doesn’t require you to say “yeah but bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. Why won’t you?

What you need to do is give us an authoritative definition of at what point our capitalist society ceases to be a Capitalist society and becomes a Socialist one. If you can’t your theory doesn’t have any validity and is worthless in determining what kind of society we have.

Woof!

 

[Bad_Doggie]

Post 296 I clearly state my position.

I've said it more than once.

"I think any political theory that advocates government control over the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods and services is socialism. "

But you keep reading something along the lines of 'If socialism is government then all governments are socialist" and calling it a 4 legged dog fallacy and RD keeps seeing "I think all government regulation is socialism." .

See this is where you don’t even understand what the thread it about. It is about misusing definitions. What YOU think is not a definition and no one gives a fuck what you think.

Post a definition which says that.

Woof!

 

[BotanyBoy]

He'll deflect your question by asking another question.

Or accusing me of some more random shit.

We have been discussing socialism. You have been discussing your own nonsense.

You've been discussing my nonsense far more than socialism.

I'm just trying to connect with you guys one what you think the definition means.

And so far all I can tell you guys think it's not Socialism until a "Department of _____" gets put on the building/door/sign.


If you're even lucky enough to get into a position (cook kids club) that the 20,000 pages of regulations telling people how to run their company from top to bottom and the heavy fees associated for the privilege or you go to prison is totally not at all socialist in any way. Because government control means nothing, ownership is the defining factor right?

I argue that control is ownership.

Thus the car question everyone clinging to that ownership factor is avoiding like the fucking plague.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Except that wasn’t your question was it? Your question was…..

It wasn't explicit enough for you to understand that I was taking it from you.

You still don't seem to understand that.

I own a car……what makes you think I can’t do what the fuck I like with it?

Government power buddy.

Replace me with the government.

If the government takes control over your car, makes you eat it, but you still get to hold the title...which effectively means fuck all now, who owns the car?

You or the government?

What YOU think is not a definition and no one gives a fuck what you think.


Woof!

I didn't say it was day day, learn to read.

And if they didn't then why did they ask??

YIP YIP!!! YIP YIP!!

 

[oggbashan]

I see it - again.

BotanyBoy:

https://pics.onsizzle.com/yes-yes-i-see-now-youre-a-cunt-14161595.png

 

[oggbashan]

...

I argue that control is ownership.

Thus the car question everyone clinging to that ownership factor is avoiding like the fucking plague.

Control is ownership? I can control a computer without owning it. I can control a bicycle, a car, set the rules of a sports club - all without owning them.

The car question is irrelevant and has been answered:

1. If you hire a car you have control of it. You don't own it. You never own it. If you don't pay the hire company they will take the car back and sue your ass.

2. If you take my car away, that's theft.

Your car question has NOTHING to do with socialism.

 

[richard_daily]

If you're even lucky enough to get into a position (cook kids club) that the 20,000 pages of regulations telling people how to run their company from top to bottom and the heavy fees associated for the privilege or you go to prison is totally not at all socialist in any way. Because government control means nothing, ownership is the defining factor right?

I argue that control is ownership.

Control is ownership.

However, your faulty logic scenario using the "who owns a car" DOES NOT EXIST in any country in the world, and therefore is only useful to you to try to avoid talking about what the actual definitions are, and how you are using them incorrectly.

You are jumping a series of multiple logical hurdles to get to the point where you are conflating ownership, control, socialism, and then also completely misusing left wing and right wing, all at the same time, and then getting upset that other people are calling you on your completely incorrect usage of all of these terms.

You're using half (or less) of a dictionary definition, and then adding a bunch of extra "I think" logic, which has no basis in reality or history.

 

[richard_daily]

If a tree falls in the woods, and no one is around to hear it complain about socialism by using the definition incorrectly, is socialism still an effective boogiman?

 

[cowslinger64]

It wasn't explicit enough for you to understand that I was taking it from you.

You still don't seem to understand that.



Government power buddy.

Replace me with the government.

If the government takes control over your car, makes you eat it, but you still get to hold the title...which effectively means fuck all now, who owns the car?

You or the government?



I didn't say it was day day, learn to read.

And if they didn't then why did they ask??

YIP YIP!!! YIP YIP!!

“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.”


― W.C. Fields