Printable View
Is it possible that China and Russia where dormant in the last couple of decades until we warmed up to them?
They opened up just enough to capture the global markets and now springing an economic trap on us?
Klaus Schwab born in 1938 is a child of the Third Reich and Nazi socialism.
His influence is pretty profound in this Global Reset.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Schwab
Impact. Just read about him pretty smart guy. He was only 7 years old when the Nazis and their socialist ideas were tossed . Why would all his ideas be wrong? Sounds like some good aspirations there. For all stakeholders ,not just shareholders sounds good. Like Air Canada and Petro Canada used to be owned by Canadians and made money for us and not shareholders. Or the 407 in Ontario.Many more examples.
Who said they were dormant, look at Russia and China's involvement in the world, especially Russia with Syria, Iran, Crimea, Georgia.... Heck China is funding it's economy with selling cheap to other countries, stealing their tech and bribes and using it to build their military and keeping their party firmly in power.Quote:
Originally Posted by impact
I would argue Klaus Shwab's relation to the third Reich, being from that era having looked at his background he is likely attracted (Like Justin Trudeau) to dictatorships and tyrants and that power and but he seems to have more crept into the Socialist/Communist camp. He really can be seen signed on as a useful idiot into the Chinese Communist agenda more and more. Often people like him have lost attachment to the realities in the world or possibly just sold out.. or perhaps just bought into the goals. Those that feel they are the elite often feel they should be the ones that have earned the power, position and entitlements.
In the end people like him have often can be seen as having no empathy or understanding of others and a sense of entitlement and elitism ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI67fHfVUbc
I like the way Jordan Peterson talks about Orwell's writing after he "woke up" and described the intellectual socialist as having the motivation "that the reforms are what we the clever ones will impose on them the lower orders"
So in the end if you look a the history and use your brain it ends up the elites creating serfs so that all but the rulers and elites and intellectia guarantee all others are at the same level, the same level of being oppressed, the same level of poverty and the same level of reliance on the ones in power.
Two statements that always come to mind.
Margret Thatcher - "The problem with socialism is - you eventually run out of other peoples money"
Democratic Socialism - "You can vote your way into it - but have to shoot your way out of it" - A "Reddit user from Venezuela"
Seems to "work" in Democratic Societies like Sweden ( That place some of you capitalist admire).....................;)
Capitalism...Well look at the shiphole south of us. It doesn't work either...
You couldn't pay me, to move to either Venezuela............or...........the US ( a stinking cesspool that going to blow)
Some conservatives are attracted to UBI because it would in theory make government more efficient. Under UBI the entire alphabet soup of welfare and social assistance programs (OW, EI, OAS, ODSP, WSIB, CPP etc.) would be gone along with about a million or so civil servants at all levels of government who run those programs. It would not necessarily be hugely more expensive because much of the cost would be covered by tax money going to current programs and further defrayed by EI premiums, CPP contributions and corporate payments for workplace disability insurance.
The opposition to UBI comes behind closed doors from the public service unions who do not want to lose hundreds of millions in dues.
Those seem to apply if you look at history in most cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by line052
Yeah, interesting how people like to bring up Sweden.... but it rates in the top 20 market driven countries...Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerz...h=669939546c5a
"Spoiler alert: Modern Sweden is not a socialist country. According to the Heritage Foundation’s 2019 Index of Economic Freedom ranking, Sweden is among the 20 most market-oriented economies in the world. With an “Economic Freedom Score” of 75.2, Sweden has a similar level of economic freedom to the United States (76.8) and ranks ahead of South Korea and Germany. "
* Sweden being one of the rare cases that got out of it with votes.... some don't seem to like freedom sadly though. There are those who actually hate the idea someone might be better than them in something and get ahead with hard work and integrity that they don't want to do! Hence that jealousy and hatred that gets them to favour forced outcomes and then you get the ones that think of themselves as the elites that feel the need to force their ideology on others... Socialism is for those that can't or won't face the reality that hard work, integrity and careful thought and planning work.... hence you get ideologues that say budgets balance themselves, all while they have staff doing their personal balancing and they go ski.
"depends" Mosquito.
You do I hope understand that Canada is widely looked as a democratic socialist country? I've always held the belief (?) that too much of anything is rarely good. Worded differently, all things in moderation. Do you like our healthcare ( big problems not withstanding)? What about education. The epitome of freedom and capitilism, is barely literate and many go bankrupt when they run into life happens ( medical stuff). Just look south of today......
The US is a shytehole. Where poverty is a real problem, where inner cities are deteriorating, where gun deaths per capita are off the charts and people don't venture out unless packing. And much more that could be mentioned. That's not my definition of freedom....
We could also look at the U.K and India.
Where there are very rigid, very hard to break out of classes. The caste system.
Basically, we should be asking ourselves if what we have is working. For the most part we could say yes, but there are huge problems. Like the shrinking middle class........
Just because JT or Liberals, don't thrill us, or whatever we want to call it. Doesn't mean, that somewhere in the middle, between pure Socialism and pure capitalism, and democratic socialism ( Like Canada or Scandavian countries). Can't work
You do know that the 'U" in UBI stands for 'Universal'...that means that EVERYONE gets taxpayer money put in the account. That includes the top 1% of the richest people. Yes , guys like David Thomson ($39 billion)..Galen Weston ($9 billion) James Irving ($6.3 billion).Quote:
Originally Posted by Badenoch
The taxpayer gives them their $24K a year under a UBI...
that means that 38 million people will get $24K a year..how is that not going to cost too much. ??
edit add: and for clarification:
Quote:
A three-year basic income pilot that the Ontario provincial government, Canada, launched in the cities of Hamilton, Thunder Bay and Lindsay in July 2017. Although called basic income, it was only made available to those with a low income and funding would be removed if they obtained employment, making it more related to the current welfare system than true basic income. The pilot project was canceled on 31 July 2018 by the newly elected Progressive Conservative government under Ontario Premier Doug Ford.
I was going to post this in the other forum, as a new thread. Then saw where this discussion was heading.
It relates to many discussions, be it Real Estate, be it the middle class, haves and have nots, the 20% club, or some form of UBI. Seems weird listening to a conservative call a spade a spade and how those in the 20% are breaking the backs of the those in the 60% club and why things like taxation hit the greater number disportionately.
https://www.facebook.com/PierrePoili...80542858803553