Donate!
Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register :: View Members
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
Send Topic Print
Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations? (Read 525 times)
T And T Garage
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 9839

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #45 - 03/12/19 at 15:16:51
 
MnSpring wrote on 03/12/19 at 15:13:56:
T And T Garage wrote on 03/12/19 at 15:07:09:
Looking really smart mn!  

Aww-Gee tt,
I just wanna be equal too !
Gimme, Gimme, a free seat tt !

Oh, WAIT, if you gave me a free seat,
that would NOT, be equal,
it would be BETTER, than the others.
Who Paid for their seat.


Wow, smart and witty.  Keep up the great work!
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Ex Member




Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #46 - 03/12/19 at 15:51:19
 
MnSpring wrote on 03/12/19 at 15:01:09:
T And T Garage wrote on 03/12/19 at 14:55:42:
But you keep asking mn.  

But Lost said I can.
After all, I want to be, equal, also !


no, no I didn't....  

quit putting words in my mouth...  



Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Eegore
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 7966

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #47 - 03/12/19 at 16:17:11
 

 I'm still wondering what the logic is regarding allowing anyone who geographically is in a location at the time of an election to take part.

 It's like saying if I move to Japan, illegally, do not obtain an official records of being a citizen there, that I get to vote.  Even after breaking their laws, I get to vote on the outcome of a place I am an active criminal in.

 That's ok?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Ex Member




Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #48 - 03/12/19 at 16:23:39
 
Eegore wrote on 03/12/19 at 16:17:11:
 I'm still wondering what the logic is regarding allowing anyone who geographically is in a location at the time of an election to take part.

 It's like saying if I move to Japan, illegally, do not obtain an official records of being a citizen there, that I get to vote.  Even after breaking their laws, I get to vote on the outcome of a place I am an active criminal in.

 That's ok?


it's not that you are "in a location" it's that you have residency there.  As such, you have a vested interest in the quality of life and what's good for that community, because it DIRECTLY affects you cause YOU LIVE THERE.  

and I think I've heard that the average person breaks 3 laws a day without even knowing it, so chances are, you're a criminal where you are now.

"Every day, the average American commits three felonies. So argues civil-liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate in his new book “Three Felonies a Day,” the title of which refers to the number of crimes he estimates that Americans perpetrate each day because of vague and overly burdensome laws."

Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Eegore
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 7966

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #49 - 03/12/19 at 16:28:21
 
 I'm still wondering what the logic is regarding allowing anyone who geographically lives in a location at the time of an election to take part.

 Regardless of legal citizenship?

 I can move to Japan and be a voting citizen just by choosing a location to stay at and call my residence?  

 Should that be allowed?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Ex Member




Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #50 - 03/12/19 at 16:37:19
 
Eegore wrote on 03/12/19 at 16:28:21:
 I'm still wondering what the logic is regarding allowing anyone who geographically lives in a location at the time of an election to take part.

 Regardless of legal citizenship?

 I can move to Japan and be a voting citizen just by choosing a location to stay at and call my residence?  

 Should that be allowed?


yes. if it's your primary residence, you only get to vote in/for/concerning one place
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 12809

Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #51 - 03/12/19 at 18:07:26
 
LostArtist wrote on 03/12/19 at 16:37:19:
Eegore wrote on 03/12/19 at 16:28:21:
 I'm still wondering what the logic is regarding allowing anyone who geographically lives in a location at the time of an election to take part.

 Regardless of legal citizenship?

 I can move to Japan and be a voting citizen just by choosing a location to stay at and call my residence?  

 Should that be allowed?


yes. if it's your primary residence, you only get to vote in/for/concerning one place


You can't be serious?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Eegore
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 7966

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #52 - 03/12/19 at 19:25:59
 

"yes. if it's your primary residence, you only get to vote in/for/concerning one place"

 So this might be a discussion for an entirely different thread, but I am interested in how you expect countries to simply not take citizenship into account.

 I do believe you are the only person I've interacted with that thinks people should be able to take up residence anywhere they want/can and vote, given voting happens there.

Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 12809

Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #53 - 03/13/19 at 04:44:10
 
Eegore wrote on 03/12/19 at 19:25:59:
"yes. if it's your primary residence, you only get to vote in/for/concerning one place"

 So this might be a discussion for an entirely different thread, but I am interested in how you expect countries to simply not take citizenship into account.

 I do believe you are the only person I've interacted with that thinks people should be able to take up residence anywhere they want/can and vote, given voting happens there.


Eegore, if you think Lost is the only one who thinks that, you've not been keeping up with Democratic politics.....
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Ex Member




Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #54 - 03/13/19 at 10:55:23
 
Eegore wrote on 03/12/19 at 19:25:59:
"yes. if it's your primary residence, you only get to vote in/for/concerning one place"

 So this might be a discussion for an entirely different thread, but I am interested in how you expect countries to simply not take citizenship into account.

 I do believe you are the only person I've interacted with that thinks people should be able to take up residence anywhere they want/can and vote, given voting happens there.



when I moved from Pennsylvania to Texas, I had to establish residency in my local area, changed my driver's license, paid registration/taxes on my car, proved I lived someplace for 6 months or something, then I could vote there.  

so first, ask yourself, what's the point of voting?  should only elites be allowed to vote? how do you define an elite? couldn't it be defined as citizen? so now you have a group of people living in an area, but only some of them can vote...  is that fair to the rest that live there, to deny them a voice?  Do you only want people who pay over 20% in income tax to pay as well? obviously they are more important than anyone else right?

I don't think you understand democracy.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Ex Member




Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #55 - 03/13/19 at 10:58:45
 
isn't citizenship just a formal declaration of residency?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
MnSpring
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

Younger than most
people my age.

Posts: 8955
Minn
Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #56 - 03/13/19 at 11:05:00
 
LostArtist wrote on 03/12/19 at 16:23:39:
"Every day, the average American commits three felonies. So argues civil-liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate in his new book “Three Felonies a Day,” the title of which refers to the number of crimes he estimates that Americans perpetrate each day because of vague and overly burdensome laws."  


A first-degree felony: murder, rape, kidnapping, arson, fraud. Second-degree felony: aggravated assault, felony assault, arson, manslaughter, possession of a controlled substance, child molestation.

So the Author of that book, if he took into account the populations of the States that have legal Marijuana, (because it is still a Federal Crime), MAY be getting close.

Yet I believe he is a LONG way away, from that statement being true.

So back to the point,
what would one call a person that wants,
a ILLEGAL person to be able to VOTE.
By just saying, 'I live here'.

Is that like Minn, and other States where one only has to SAY, 'I am a Citizen', and not have to PROVE it ?



Back to top
 
 

Ben Franklin once said: "If you give up a freedom, for the sake of security, you will have neither".
Which is More TRUE, today, than yesterday.('06, S-40, Stock) well, mostly .
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 12809

Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #57 - 03/13/19 at 11:36:26
 
so first, ask yourself, what's the point of voting?  The point of voting is to have a voice in the governing of your community.
should only elites be allowed to vote? how do you define an elite? couldn't it be defined as citizen?
Not sure what the tie in to the word elite is. A citizen is a legal resident of a given area. Voters meet certain citizenship criteria before being allowed to have a voice in the community. Children are citizens but are not allowed to vote, mentally unstable, etc..

so now you have a group of people living in an area, but only some of them can vote...  is that fair to the rest that live there, to deny them a voice?  
Yes its fair.  Sorry, but I don't buy into the voting is an absolute right. I would describe voting as an earned privilege.  

Do you only want people who pay over 20% in income tax to pay as well? obviously they are more important than anyone else right?
I want people to vote who have demonstrated and/or have a likelihood of demonstrating what we usually refer to as skin in the game. Illegal immigrants may have skin in the game in the sense they are living in a community but they are illegal. They 'broke into' this house and set up camp. I am aware we have illegals here who are more dedicated to this nation than many born and raised here. I get that, but you can't just break and enter into a country and have a say in how its run. If someone broke into your house, refused to leave, began participating in the order of the house and its family, does he get to have the same level of authority as you, the rightful owner of the house? He might be a swell guy, useful, contributing economically to the household, but does that mean he's the same as you?

I don't think you understand democracy.
I don't think you understand citizenship.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Ex Member




Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #58 - 03/13/19 at 11:45:29
 
MnSpring wrote on 03/13/19 at 11:05:00:
LostArtist wrote on 03/12/19 at 16:23:39:
"Every day, the average American commits three felonies. So argues civil-liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate in his new book “Three Felonies a Day,” the title of which refers to the number of crimes he estimates that Americans perpetrate each day because of vague and overly burdensome laws."  


A first-degree felony: murder, rape, kidnapping, arson, fraud. Second-degree felony: aggravated assault, felony assault, arson, manslaughter, possession of a controlled substance, child molestation.

So the Author of that book, if he took into account the populations of the States that have legal Marijuana, (because it is still a Federal Crime), MAY be getting close.

Yet I believe he is a LONG way away, from that statement being true.

So back to the point,
what would one call a person that wants,
a ILLEGAL person to be able to VOTE.
By just saying, 'I live here'.

Is that like Minn, and other States where one only has to SAY, 'I am a Citizen', and not have to PROVE it ?





no, you'd have to prove residency via documentation, just like I had to in order to vote in Texas for Texas state and local things.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Ex Member




Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #59 - 03/13/19 at 11:47:49
 


I don't think you understand democracy.
I don't think you understand citizenship. [/quote]


they don't have anything to do with each other,
we force that condition on democracy, it's not an innate part of democracy
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
Send Topic Print


« Home

 
« Home
SuzukiSavage.com
03/29/24 at 08:07:23



General CategoryPolitics, Religion (Tall Table) › Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?


SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2!
YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved.