Obama trying to change the 2nd admendment through executive order.

  • 171 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for scorch-62
scorch-62

29763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#101 scorch-62
Member since 2006 • 29763 Posts

[QUOTE="DarkGamer007"]

[QUOTE="ristactionjakso"]

http://amerpundit.com/2011/03/16/obama-considering-executive-orders-to-change-gun-laws/

So Obama is intending on changing the gun amendment of America through an exucutive order.

Is he trying to come off as a dictator? Or is he trying to turn America into a communist country?

ShadowMoses900

1) :lol: at implying Obama is a dictator.

2) You have no idea what Communism is.

I don't think Obama is a dictator but anyone who wants to ban guns is. It takes away the power from people so they can't fight back. All the dictators love massive amounts of gun control and gun banslike Hitler Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Castro, Pol Pot ect... All these **** banned guns, and they did it for power. But I don't think Obama is doing that because the site that was linked is really a fringe site and it's not accurate IMO. I don't think Obama is doing this.

And Communism takes guns away from people for the same exact reason as I mentioned before, power. Communism is about giving up your rights to be a slave to a tyrant who belives everyone should be treated equally, which sounds good but in Communism everyone does get treated equally, just equally bad. Democracy is the only way for true equality and rights. Communism is for people who hate freedom and want to be slaves.

You also have no idea what communism is.
Avatar image for RandoIph
RandoIph

2041

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#102 RandoIph
Member since 2010 • 2041 Posts

Good luck. The NRA is one of the best funded organizations around and they won't let anything he tries to do concerning guns stand.

airshocker
I like how he has signed more legislation and orders that are pro-gun ownership than Bush, and is still demonized by the NRA and the redneck hillbillies as "He gonna take our gunz!!!!11!".
Avatar image for redstorm72
redstorm72

4646

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#103 redstorm72
Member since 2008 • 4646 Posts

This is off topic, but I don't understand, the second amendment states that American citizens have the right to bear arms, yet there are already government restrictions on what arms you can bear (no, automatic weapons, RPG's, etc). So how is adding more gun control suddenly against the constitution? You can't own an automatic assualt rifle now, so why would it be against the constitution to ban other types of firearms?

Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#104 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="DarkGamer007"]

1) :lol: at implying Obama is a dictator.

2) You have no idea what Communism is.

scorch-62

I don't think Obama is a dictator but anyone who wants to ban guns is. It takes away the power from people so they can't fight back. All the dictators love massive amounts of gun control and gun banslike Hitler Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Castro, Pol Pot ect... All these **** banned guns, and they did it for power. But I don't think Obama is doing that because the site that was linked is really a fringe site and it's not accurate IMO. I don't think Obama is doing this.

And Communism takes guns away from people for the same exact reason as I mentioned before, power. Communism is about giving up your rights to be a slave to a tyrant who belives everyone should be treated equally, which sounds good but in Communism everyone does get treated equally, just equally bad. Democracy is the only way for true equality and rights. Communism is for people who hate freedom and want to be slaves.

You also have no idea what communism is.

Yes I do because I learn about the outside world and know how it really works. Go move to North Korea if it's so great and since you are an expert on Communism, after all I'm sure the people there are free and happy right? :roll:

Avatar image for scorch-62
scorch-62

29763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#105 scorch-62
Member since 2006 • 29763 Posts
Yes I do because I learn about the outside world and know how it really works. Go move to North Korea if it's so great and since you are an expert on Communism, after all I'm sure the people there are free and happy right? :roll:ShadowMoses900
If you knew anything about communism, you would know that North Korea and the like are terrible examples of true communism. Communism as a theory has never been executed properly.
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#106 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts
[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Yes I do because I learn about the outside world and know how it really works. Go move to North Korea if it's so great and since you are an expert on Communism, after all I'm sure the people there are free and happy right? :roll:scorch-62
If you knew anything about communism, you would know that North Korea and the like are terrible examples of true communism. Communism as a theory has never been executed properly.

It's sort of like is Liberals saying "You want your libertarian paradise? Move to Somalia!" to put it in easy to understand terms.
Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#107 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Yes I do because I learn about the outside world and know how it really works. Go move to North Korea if it's so great and since you are an expert on Communism, after all I'm sure the people there are free and happy right? :roll:scorch-62
If you knew anything about communism, you would know that North Korea and the like are terrible examples of true communism. Communism as a theory has never been executed properly.

That's because it doesn't work and it can't because Marx wasn't very intelligent. Capitlism is a terrible system but atleast it works, for just about any real society to work and be free you have to have capitilism but mix in some socialism aswell. Communism is just a disaster and there will never be a good communist country, both communism and fascism need to go away and people need to see how the world really works and realise that the sooner people stop following these two ideals the better.

Fascism is basically gone now but there are still some who follow it life Neo Nazis. Communism on the other hand has people that support it which is funny because they don't know anything about it, they just do it for shock value to get attention that they never got from thier parents as kids, so they try to get it through something else. None of these people would ever live in a communist country because those countires and the idealogy suck and they know it does deep down.

Communism will NEVER work, give up on it.

Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#108 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts
Communism will NEVER work, give up on it.ShadowMoses900
At a certain technological point it's pretty much going to be the way things work. It only doesn't work now because we lack resources for everyone.
Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#109 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Communism will NEVER work, give up on it.Ace6301
At a certain technological point it's pretty much going to be the way things work. It only doesn't work now because we lack resources for everyone.

Ya it will happen because commie sympathizores keep wanting to be Che Guevara wannabe's, that's why. It won't happen because there will always be people who love freedom and democracy. Where are you basing this off of?

Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#110 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Communism will NEVER work, give up on it.ShadowMoses900

At a certain technological point it's pretty much going to be the way things work. It only doesn't work now because we lack resources for everyone.

Ya it will happen because commie sympathizores keep wanting to be Che Guevara wannabe's, that's why. It won't happen because there will always be people who love freedom and democracy. Where are you basing this off of?

Because if everyone can be provided for with very high standard of living then businesses would be worthless and a government of any real size would be about as useless. Things change, we could never have lived the way we do 300 years ago. Communism at it's core is basically just polite anarchy.
Avatar image for Frame_Dragger
Frame_Dragger

9581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#111 Frame_Dragger
Member since 2009 • 9581 Posts
[QUOTE="ristactionjakso"]

http://amerpundit.com/2011/03/16/obama-considering-executive-orders-to-change-gun-laws/

So Obama is intending on changing the gun amendment of America through an exucutive order.

Is he trying to come off as a dictator? Or is he trying to turn America into a communist country?

Neither, because this is a load of **** from top to bottom.
Avatar image for one_plum
one_plum

6825

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#112 one_plum
Member since 2009 • 6825 Posts

[QUOTE="scorch-62"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Yes I do because I learn about the outside world and know how it really works. Go move to North Korea if it's so great and since you are an expert on Communism, after all I'm sure the people there are free and happy right? :roll:ShadowMoses900

If you knew anything about communism, you would know that North Korea and the like are terrible examples of true communism. Communism as a theory has never been executed properly.

That's because it doesn't work and it can't because Marx wasn't very intelligent. Capitlism is a terrible system but atleast it works, for just about any real society to work and be free you have to have capitilism but mix in some socialism aswell. Communism is just a disaster and there will never be a good communist country, both communism and fascism need to go away and people need to see how the world really works and realise that the sooner people stop following these two ideals the better.

Fascism is basically gone now but there are still some who follow it life Neo Nazis. Communism on the other hand has people that support it which is funny because they don't know anything about it, they just do it for shock value to get attention that they never got from thier parents as kids, so they try to get it through something else. None of these people would ever live in a communist country because those countires and the idealogy suck and they know it does deep down.

Communism will NEVER work, give up on it.

Perhaps you can at least look at tribal communities for comparison; they're much closer to communism than North Korea.

Avatar image for scorch-62
scorch-62

29763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#113 scorch-62
Member since 2006 • 29763 Posts
Communism on the other hand has people that support it which is funny because they don't know anything about itShadowMoses900
Irony.
Avatar image for Frame_Dragger
Frame_Dragger

9581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#114 Frame_Dragger
Member since 2009 • 9581 Posts
[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Communism will NEVER work, give up on it.Ace6301
At a certain technological point it's pretty much going to be the way things work. It only doesn't work now because we lack resources for everyone.

Unless someone figures out a way to make rare earth elements out of magic and candy, we're never going to have enough resources, and that's just one example.
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#115 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Communism will NEVER work, give up on it.Frame_Dragger
At a certain technological point it's pretty much going to be the way things work. It only doesn't work now because we lack resources for everyone.

Unless someone figures out a way to make rare earth elements out of magic and candy, we're never going to have enough resources, and that's just one example.

I'm being hypothetical. He said it would never work. Under certain circumstances it would. It's just those circumstances are very unlikely.
Avatar image for CaveJohnson1
CaveJohnson1

1714

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#116 CaveJohnson1
Member since 2011 • 1714 Posts

What's he trying to do? It sounds like he's discussing things like beefing up background checks and improving data sharing (words from the article), but how does that infringe on the second amendment?mattbbpl
People like to whine

Once you realize that, alot is easily explained.

Avatar image for CaveJohnson1
CaveJohnson1

1714

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#117 CaveJohnson1
Member since 2011 • 1714 Posts

Also ShadowMoses, you don't understand what communism is, you're making you're side look stupid.

Just go on wiki or dictionary.com and do some reading on it.

Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#118 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] At a certain technological point it's pretty much going to be the way things work. It only doesn't work now because we lack resources for everyone.Ace6301

Ya it will happen because commie sympathizores keep wanting to be Che Guevara wannabe's, that's why. It won't happen because there will always be people who love freedom and democracy. Where are you basing this off of?

Because if everyone can be provided for with very high standard of living then businesses would be worthless and a government of any real size would be about as useless. Things change, we could never have lived the way we do 300 years ago. Communism at it's core is basically just polite anarchy.

No you don't understand and it will never happen. ever. Not the way you think anyway.

Let's say we all live in the future and we share resources like food and whatnot, and you and me are farmers. We both grow a similar type of cropand both of our crops are valuable to the community. However youfigure out a way to grow more cropsthat are better than mine, and the people in the community find out about yourcrops and thewant your crops instead of mine. Now youcan't grow enough crops to feed everyone on your own but everyone wants them so you make a deal that you will grow one more cropper person who trades something with you,after all this crop work is hard. They agree and youknow havemore goods than anyone else in the community. Ion the other handam forced to compete withyou because I want the success and ''wealth'' your getting, so I start figuring out ways to improve my product ect...

That's whyit won't work. Wewant to get ahead and don't want to be stuck doing the same thing. If there was no competition than nothing would improve and that's why communism fails. We WANT to get more and wantt o get more success and support. It's human nature.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

23367

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#119 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 23367 Posts

Also ShadowMoses, you don't understand what communism is, you're making you're side look stupid.

Just go on wiki or dictionary.com and do some reading on it.

CaveJohnson1
The article outright states that working within the confines of executive orders is more limiting, which directly implies that he's working within established laws (and the constitution). It doesn't seem like he's contradicting anything here.
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#120 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Ya it will happen because commie sympathizores keep wanting to be Che Guevara wannabe's, that's why. It won't happen because there will always be people who love freedom and democracy. Where are you basing this off of?

ShadowMoses900

Because if everyone can be provided for with very high standard of living then businesses would be worthless and a government of any real size would be about as useless. Things change, we could never have lived the way we do 300 years ago. Communism at it's core is basically just polite anarchy.

No you don't understand and it will never happen. ever. Not the way you think anyway.

Let's say we all live in the future and we share resources like food and whatnot, and you and me are farmers. We both grow a similar type of cropand both of our crops are valuable to the community. However youfigure out a way to grow more cropsthat are better than mine, and the people in the community find out about yourcrops and thewant your crops instead of mine. Now youcan't grow enough crops to feed everyone on your own but everyone wants them so you make a deal that you will grow one more cropper person who trades something with you,after all this crop work is hard. They agree and youknow havemore goods than anyone else in the community. Ion the other handam forced to compete withyou because I want the success and ''wealth'' your getting, so I start figuring out ways to improve my product ect...

That's whyit won't work. Wewant to get ahead and don't want to be stuck doing the same thing. If there was no competition than nothing would improve and that's why communism fails. We WANT to get more and wantt o get more success and support. It's human nature.

Actually I'd just tell you how I've been doing it and things continue on the way they were. Also I was talking about a stupidly advanced level of science. Like matter modulation made possible. Once a single one is made there's no need to manufacture anything ever again and there's no reason to go after others possessions. Communism would work fine in such a situation even though the only really communistic part would be giving other people the machine.
Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#121 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]Communism on the other hand has people that support it which is funny because they don't know anything about itscorch-62
Irony.

Quite funny coming from the dude who said he understood communism because he's a Jew like Marx was.

Avatar image for Palantas
Palantas

15329

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#122 Palantas
Member since 2002 • 15329 Posts

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Good luck. The NRA is one of the best funded organizations around and they won't let anything he tries to do concerning guns stand.

topsemag55

Neither will the Supreme Court. Come to think of it, the House will mount an aggressive defense of the 2nd Amendment, and Democratic senators (except Reid) won't agree with Obama.

Yeah. As a firearm owner, I am not concerned with this.

Avatar image for one_plum
one_plum

6825

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#123 one_plum
Member since 2009 • 6825 Posts

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Ya it will happen because commie sympathizores keep wanting to be Che Guevara wannabe's, that's why. It won't happen because there will always be people who love freedom and democracy. Where are you basing this off of?

ShadowMoses900

Because if everyone can be provided for with very high standard of living then businesses would be worthless and a government of any real size would be about as useless. Things change, we could never have lived the way we do 300 years ago. Communism at it's core is basically just polite anarchy.

No you don't understand and it will never happen. ever. Not the way you think anyway.

Let's say we all live in the future and we share resources like food and whatnot, and you and me are farmers. We both grow a similar type of cropand both of our crops are valuable to the community. However youfigure out a way to grow more cropsthat are better than mine, and the people in the community find out about yourcrops and thewant your crops instead of mine. Now youcan't grow enough crops to feed everyone on your own but everyone wants them so you make a deal that you will grow one more cropper person who trades something with you,after all this crop work is hard. They agree and youknow havemore goods than anyone else in the community. Ion the other handam forced to compete withyou because I want the success and ''wealth'' your getting, so I start figuring out ways to improve my product ect...

That's whyit won't work. Wewant to get ahead and don't want to be stuck doing the same thing. If there was no competition than nothing would improve and that's why communism fails. We WANT to get more and wantt o get more success and support. It's human nature.

And how is this relevant to taking away people's rights to have guns?

Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#124 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] Because if everyone can be provided for with very high standard of living then businesses would be worthless and a government of any real size would be about as useless. Things change, we could never have lived the way we do 300 years ago. Communism at it's core is basically just polite anarchy. one_plum

No you don't understand and it will never happen. ever. Not the way you think anyway.

Let's say we all live in the future and we share resources like food and whatnot, and you and me are farmers. We both grow a similar type of cropand both of our crops are valuable to the community. However youfigure out a way to grow more cropsthat are better than mine, and the people in the community find out about yourcrops and thewant your crops instead of mine. Now youcan't grow enough crops to feed everyone on your own but everyone wants them so you make a deal that you will grow one more cropper person who trades something with you,after all this crop work is hard. They agree and youknow havemore goods than anyone else in the community. Ion the other handam forced to compete withyou because I want the success and ''wealth'' your getting, so I start figuring out ways to improve my product ect...

That's whyit won't work. Wewant to get ahead and don't want to be stuck doing the same thing. If there was no competition than nothing would improve and that's why communism fails. We WANT to get more and wantt o get more success and support. It's human nature.

And how is this relevant to taking away people's rights to have guns?

Because he thinks Communists are for big government or some nonsense.
Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#125 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] Because if everyone can be provided for with very high standard of living then businesses would be worthless and a government of any real size would be about as useless. Things change, we could never have lived the way we do 300 years ago. Communism at it's core is basically just polite anarchy. Ace6301

No you don't understand and it will never happen. ever. Not the way you think anyway.

Let's say we all live in the future and we share resources like food and whatnot, and you and me are farmers. We both grow a similar type of cropand both of our crops are valuable to the community. However youfigure out a way to grow more cropsthat are better than mine, and the people in the community find out about yourcrops and thewant your crops instead of mine. Now youcan't grow enough crops to feed everyone on your own but everyone wants them so you make a deal that you will grow one more cropper person who trades something with you,after all this crop work is hard. They agree and youknow havemore goods than anyone else in the community. Ion the other handam forced to compete withyou because I want the success and ''wealth'' your getting, so I start figuring out ways to improve my product ect...

That's whyit won't work. Wewant to get ahead and don't want to be stuck doing the same thing. If there was no competition than nothing would improve and that's why communism fails. We WANT to get more and wantt o get more success and support. It's human nature.

Actually I'd just tell you how I've been doing it and things continue on the way they were. Also I was talking about a stupidly advanced level of science. Like matter modulation made possible. Once a single one is made there's no need to manufacture anything ever again and there's no reason to go after others possessions. Communism would work fine in such a situation even though the only really communistic part would be giving other people the machine.

Still wouldn't work, people would find a way to want to improve and compete. It doesn't have to be manufacturing, it can be anything. Like we would just end up competing in sports or music ect... instead. Like let's say I could play music really well and I offer my music if people are willing to trade me something for it. There yours competition. Plus I don't know why you are against the idea, I don't want to get paid the same as everyone else, if I have a good idea and want to use it to improve my life, I deserve to be rewarded for it.

Avatar image for Frame_Dragger
Frame_Dragger

9581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#126 Frame_Dragger
Member since 2009 • 9581 Posts
[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] At a certain technological point it's pretty much going to be the way things work. It only doesn't work now because we lack resources for everyone.Ace6301
Unless someone figures out a way to make rare earth elements out of magic and candy, we're never going to have enough resources, and that's just one example.

I'm being hypothetical. He said it would never work. Under certain circumstances it would. It's just those circumstances are very unlikely.

Ahhhh, this is why I shoudl read more to establish context before I post. *hangs head*
Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#127 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

No you don't understand and it will never happen. ever. Not the way you think anyway.

Let's say we all live in the future and we share resources like food and whatnot, and you and me are farmers. We both grow a similar type of cropand both of our crops are valuable to the community. However youfigure out a way to grow more cropsthat are better than mine, and the people in the community find out about yourcrops and thewant your crops instead of mine. Now youcan't grow enough crops to feed everyone on your own but everyone wants them so you make a deal that you will grow one more cropper person who trades something with you,after all this crop work is hard. They agree and youknow havemore goods than anyone else in the community. Ion the other handam forced to compete withyou because I want the success and ''wealth'' your getting, so I start figuring out ways to improve my product ect...

That's whyit won't work. Wewant to get ahead and don't want to be stuck doing the same thing. If there was no competition than nothing would improve and that's why communism fails. We WANT to get more and wantt o get more success and support. It's human nature.

ShadowMoses900

Actually I'd just tell you how I've been doing it and things continue on the way they were. Also I was talking about a stupidly advanced level of science. Like matter modulation made possible. Once a single one is made there's no need to manufacture anything ever again and there's no reason to go after others possessions. Communism would work fine in such a situation even though the only really communistic part would be giving other people the machine.

Still wouldn't work, people would find a way to want to improve and compete. It doesn't have to be manufacturing, it can be anything. Like we would just end up competing in sports or music ect... instead. Like let's say I could play music really well and I offer my music if people are willing to trade me something for it. There yours competition. Plus I don't know why you are against the idea, I don't want to get paid the same as everyone else, if I have a good idea and want to use it to improve my life, I deserve to be rewarded for it.

There would be no material need so there would only be trade. As you said you could trade music for music or just play it for the sake of playing it. Still Communism.
Avatar image for Frame_Dragger
Frame_Dragger

9581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#128 Frame_Dragger
Member since 2009 • 9581 Posts
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Actually I'd just tell you how I've been doing it and things continue on the way they were. Also I was talking about a stupidly advanced level of science. Like matter modulation made possible. Once a single one is made there's no need to manufacture anything ever again and there's no reason to go after others possessions. Communism would work fine in such a situation even though the only really communistic part would be giving other people the machine. Ace6301

Still wouldn't work, people would find a way to want to improve and compete. It doesn't have to be manufacturing, it can be anything. Like we would just end up competing in sports or music ect... instead. Like let's say I could play music really well and I offer my music if people are willing to trade me something for it. There yours competition. Plus I don't know why you are against the idea, I don't want to get paid the same as everyone else, if I have a good idea and want to use it to improve my life, I deserve to be rewarded for it.

There would be no material need so there would only be trade. As you said you could trade music for music or just play it for the sake of playing it. Still Communism.

If you could say... reliably use robots to farm asteroids for raw materials, and similar revolutions allowed for universal medical care and food of top quality... sort of Star Trek-ish... yeah, it could work. It would have to be astonishingly effective automation to create an almost purely informational economy though, but in theory it could happen. You would need everyone, not to have access to equal food and medicine for instance, but for everyone to potentially have access to the BEST food and medicine. Otherwise you'll still have people who want to accumulate wealth for steak, instead of protein paste. As a pure hypothetical it works.
Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#129 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] Actually I'd just tell you how I've been doing it and things continue on the way they were. Also I was talking about a stupidly advanced level of science. Like matter modulation made possible. Once a single one is made there's no need to manufacture anything ever again and there's no reason to go after others possessions. Communism would work fine in such a situation even though the only really communistic part would be giving other people the machine. Ace6301

Still wouldn't work, people would find a way to want to improve and compete. It doesn't have to be manufacturing, it can be anything. Like we would just end up competing in sports or music ect... instead. Like let's say I could play music really well and I offer my music if people are willing to trade me something for it. There yours competition. Plus I don't know why you are against the idea, I don't want to get paid the same as everyone else, if I have a good idea and want to use it to improve my life, I deserve to be rewarded for it.

There would be no material need so there would only be trade. As you said you could trade music for music or just play it for the sake of playing it. Still Communism.

Capitilsim IS trade, what do you think it is? It's an economic system based around the buying, selling, and/or trading of goods and services (buying and selling is still trading in it's own way). We would just find different ways to trade things and compete, it could be anything from wanting extra clothing, or sexual favors, or whatever. Mabey it would be like say, I'll play music at your house every night for a month if you fix my house up a bit for me. Then I would have the nicest looking house in the community and the others within the community would see this and would be envious, so they go to you andask you to do the same butit's alot of work so you say you'll do it if they offer you a service or good.

That's capitilsm right there, just on a smaller scale but itwould happen. Communism is impossible and would neverwork. ever.

Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#130 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Still wouldn't work, people would find a way to want to improve and compete. It doesn't have to be manufacturing, it can be anything. Like we would just end up competing in sports or music ect... instead. Like let's say I could play music really well and I offer my music if people are willing to trade me something for it. There yours competition. Plus I don't know why you are against the idea, I don't want to get paid the same as everyone else, if I have a good idea and want to use it to improve my life, I deserve to be rewarded for it.

ShadowMoses900

There would be no material need so there would only be trade. As you said you could trade music for music or just play it for the sake of playing it. Still Communism.

Capitilsim IS trade, what do you think it is? It's an economic system based around the buying, selling, and/or trading of goods and services (buying and selling is still trading in it's own way). We would just find different ways to trade things and compete, it could be anything from wanting extra clothing, or sexual favors, or whatever. Mabey it would be like say, I'll play music at your house every night for a month if you fix my house up a bit for me. Then I would have the nicest looking house in the community and the others within the community would see this and would be envious, so they go to you andask you to do the same butit's alot of work so you say you'll do it if they offer you a service or good.

That's capitilsm right there, just on a smaller scale but itwould happen. Communism is impossible and would neverwork. ever.

Communism is possible, and in fact has worked in societies. And no, mere trade alone is not capitalism, and certainly not in the way being described here.

Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#131 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] There would be no material need so there would only be trade. As you said you could trade music for music or just play it for the sake of playing it. Still Communism.worlock77

Capitilsim IS trade, what do you think it is? It's an economic system based around the buying, selling, and/or trading of goods and services (buying and selling is still trading in it's own way). We would just find different ways to trade things and compete, it could be anything from wanting extra clothing, or sexual favors, or whatever. Mabey it would be like say, I'll play music at your house every night for a month if you fix my house up a bit for me. Then I would have the nicest looking house in the community and the others within the community would see this and would be envious, so they go to you andask you to do the same butit's alot of work so you say you'll do it if they offer you a service or good.

That's capitilsm right there, just on a smaller scale but itwould happen. Communism is impossible and would neverwork. ever.

Communism is possible, and in fact has worked in societies. And no, mere trade alone is not capitalism, and certainly not in the way being described here.

lol no, communism works if you enjoy living under a dictator and giving up your rights. And capitilsm is all about trade and profit, there will always be some men in the village who have more fish and goods than others and that's because they provide a better service or trade.

Avatar image for scorch-62
scorch-62

29763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#132 scorch-62
Member since 2006 • 29763 Posts
Quite funny coming from the dude who said he understood communism because he's a Jew like Marx was.worlock77
Jew powers, activate.
Avatar image for Frame_Dragger
Frame_Dragger

9581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#133 Frame_Dragger
Member since 2009 • 9581 Posts
[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Capitilsim IS trade, what do you think it is? It's an economic system based around the buying, selling, and/or trading of goods and services (buying and selling is still trading in it's own way). We would just find different ways to trade things and compete, it could be anything from wanting extra clothing, or sexual favors, or whatever. Mabey it would be like say, I'll play music at your house every night for a month if you fix my house up a bit for me. Then I would have the nicest looking house in the community and the others within the community would see this and would be envious, so they go to you andask you to do the same butit's alot of work so you say you'll do it if they offer you a service or good.

That's capitilsm right there, just on a smaller scale but itwould happen. Communism is impossible and would neverwork. ever.

Communism is possible, and in fact has worked in societies. And no, mere trade alone is not capitalism, and certainly not in the way being described here.

lol no, communism works if you enjoy living under a dictator and giving up your rights. And capitilsm is all about trade and profit, there will always be some men in the village who have more fish and goods than others and that's because they provide a better service or trade.

In real life I agree with you, but in the very specific hypthothetical that was laid out, nobody can possibly lack for fish. Yeah, it's a pretty extreme hypothetical, and in my view ignores issues such as: if two people want the same apartment because it has the best view... you've taken away the ability to bid for that. I see no solution to that simple problem in any far future without artificial control. It is the artificial control which requires absolute centralized authority and leads to what you're talking about.

Still, lets say we've well and truly damaged the planet through nuclear war, or some other means and living conditions are uniform: you have as much space as you want, but you can't have a view because (insert scifi stuff here). If you have a closed society in which any person can go to a Star Trek -esque replicator for any kind of food or object... trade is meaningless. Why bother to fish if you can dial a perfect cut of salmon? In this hypothetical laid out, where truly free trade (in both senses) is the only thing left, then you have a functional communist society.

Personally, I find that I keep thinking of conflicts that would arise, requring strong central authority, but the fish notion is not the issue.
Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#134 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Communism is possible, and in fact has worked in societies. And no, mere trade alone is not capitalism, and certainly not in the way being described here.

Frame_Dragger

lol no, communism works if you enjoy living under a dictator and giving up your rights. And capitilsm is all about trade and profit, there will always be some men in the village who have more fish and goods than others and that's because they provide a better service or trade.

In real life I agree with you, but in the very specific hypthothetical that was laid out, nobody can possibly lack for fish. Yeah, it's a pretty extreme hypothetical, and in my view ignores issues such as: if two people want the same apartment because it has the best view... you've taken away the ability to bid for that. I see no solution to that simple problem in any far future without artificial control. It is the artificial control which requires absolute centralized authority and leads to what you're talking about.

Still, lets say we've well and truly damaged the planet through nuclear war, or some other means and living conditions are uniform: you have as much space as you want, but you can't have a view because (insert scifi stuff here). If you have a closed society in which any person can go to a Star Trek -esque replicator for any kind of food or object... trade is meaningless. Why bother to fish if you can dial a perfect cut of salmon? In this hypothetical laid out, where truly free trade (in both senses) is the only thing left, then you have a functional communist society.

Personally, I find that I keep thinking of conflicts that would arise, requring strong central authority, but the fish notion is not the issue.

That scenario still wouldn't work, because somepeople would want to control things. And these people would turn into tyrants and we are right back at communism again. Even if we could make food like in Star Trek, someone would want to take control of that and limit it's uses for power and say that unless if you (insert whatever) than you can't get food from it. There would still be conflict and it wouldn't be a free society. Besides I'm sure people would still find a way to make a profit in one way or the other, it would just be the dictator running the show.

Avatar image for Chargeagles1
Chargeagles1

1711

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#135 Chargeagles1
Member since 2006 • 1711 Posts

[QUOTE="DarkGamer007"]

[QUOTE="ristactionjakso"]

http://amerpundit.com/2011/03/16/obama-considering-executive-orders-to-change-gun-laws/

So Obama is intending on changing the gun amendment of America through an exucutive order.

Is he trying to come off as a dictator? Or is he trying to turn America into a communist country?

ShadowMoses900

1) :lol: at implying Obama is a dictator.

2) You have no idea what Communism is.

I don't think Obama is a dictator but anyone who wants to ban guns is. It takes away the power from people so they can't fight back. All the dictators love massive amounts of gun control and gun banslike Hitler Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Castro, Pol Pot ect... All these **** banned guns, and they did it for power. But I don't think Obama is doing that because the site that was linked is really a fringe site and it's not accurate IMO. I don't think Obama is doing this.

And Communism takes guns away from people for the same exact reason as I mentioned before, power. Communism is about giving up your rights to be a slave to a tyrant who belives everyone should be treated equally, which sounds good but in Communism everyone does get treated equally, just equally bad. Democracy is the only way for true equality and rights. Communism is for people who hate freedom and want to be slaves.

True equality eh? I assume you're not talking about economic or social equality. Democracy, as you'll eventually realize, propogates incompetent leaders who utilize patronage, and eloquence to manipulate the public for the betterment of their kindred and supporters. It's all one big struggle for power.They hide their true intentions and nature under the facade of freedom and liberty. The rationale as to how the majority of the political leaders vote is based primarily in the amount of donations offered by unscrupulous lobbyists.The deliberate and languid nature of democracies make it so, that even the most innocuous piece of legislation, has to be bastardized by partisan "leaders" through filibustering. I'm not a proponent of communism, but your account of democracy is an idealistic and erroneous one-one that I had to refute..

Avatar image for Frame_Dragger
Frame_Dragger

9581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#136 Frame_Dragger
Member since 2009 • 9581 Posts
[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

lol no, communism works if you enjoy living under a dictator and giving up your rights. And capitilsm is all about trade and profit, there will always be some men in the village who have more fish and goods than others and that's because they provide a better service or trade.

In real life I agree with you, but in the very specific hypthothetical that was laid out, nobody can possibly lack for fish. Yeah, it's a pretty extreme hypothetical, and in my view ignores issues such as: if two people want the same apartment because it has the best view... you've taken away the ability to bid for that. I see no solution to that simple problem in any far future without artificial control. It is the artificial control which requires absolute centralized authority and leads to what you're talking about.

Still, lets say we've well and truly damaged the planet through nuclear war, or some other means and living conditions are uniform: you have as much space as you want, but you can't have a view because (insert scifi stuff here). If you have a closed society in which any person can go to a Star Trek -esque replicator for any kind of food or object... trade is meaningless. Why bother to fish if you can dial a perfect cut of salmon? In this hypothetical laid out, where truly free trade (in both senses) is the only thing left, then you have a functional communist society.

Personally, I find that I keep thinking of conflicts that would arise, requring strong central authority, but the fish notion is not the issue.

That scenario still wouldn't work, because somepeople would want to control things. And these people would turn into tyrants and we are right back at communism again. Even if we could make food like in Star Trek, someone would want to take control of that and limit it's uses for power and say that unless if you (insert whatever) than you can't get food from it. There would still be conflict and it wouldn't be a free society. Besides I'm sure people would still find a way to make a profit in one way or the other, it would just be the dictator running the show.

If one person in a world in which everyone has equal ability to produce wants control for its own sake, they would be contending with a populace that would almost certainly kill them ASAP. I don't think that people with mental defects existing is a valid argument against any form of government. No rational person would want control over everything, if they can't possibly gain any more than they already have by doing so. the number of people who want to control other for JUST the sake of control is small enough that you just hit the "gun" button on your replicator and the community solves its problem.
Avatar image for Frame_Dragger
Frame_Dragger

9581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#137 Frame_Dragger
Member since 2009 • 9581 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="DarkGamer007"]

1) :lol: at implying Obama is a dictator.

2) You have no idea what Communism is.

Chargeagles1

I don't think Obama is a dictator but anyone who wants to ban guns is. It takes away the power from people so they can't fight back. All the dictators love massive amounts of gun control and gun banslike Hitler Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Castro, Pol Pot ect... All these **** banned guns, and they did it for power. But I don't think Obama is doing that because the site that was linked is really a fringe site and it's not accurate IMO. I don't think Obama is doing this.

And Communism takes guns away from people for the same exact reason as I mentioned before, power. Communism is about giving up your rights to be a slave to a tyrant who belives everyone should be treated equally, which sounds good but in Communism everyone does get treated equally, just equally bad. Democracy is the only way for true equality and rights. Communism is for people who hate freedom and want to be slaves.

True equality eh? I assume you're not talking about economic or social equality. Democracy, as you'll eventually realize, propogates incompetent leaders who utilize patronage, and eloquence to manipulate the public for the betterment of their kindred and supporters. It's all one big struggle for power. SNIP

What form of government does NOT fit this characterization, no matter how basic?

Avatar image for Chargeagles1
Chargeagles1

1711

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#138 Chargeagles1
Member since 2006 • 1711 Posts

[QUOTE="Chargeagles1"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I don't think Obama is a dictator but anyone who wants to ban guns is. It takes away the power from people so they can't fight back. All the dictators love massive amounts of gun control and gun banslike Hitler Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Castro, Pol Pot ect... All these **** banned guns, and they did it for power. But I don't think Obama is doing that because the site that was linked is really a fringe site and it's not accurate IMO. I don't think Obama is doing this.

And Communism takes guns away from people for the same exact reason as I mentioned before, power. Communism is about giving up your rights to be a slave to a tyrant who belives everyone should be treated equally, which sounds good but in Communism everyone does get treated equally, just equally bad. Democracy is the only way for true equality and rights. Communism is for people who hate freedom and want to be slaves.

Frame_Dragger

True equality eh? I assume you're not talking about economic or social equality. Democracy, as you'll eventually realize, propogates incompetent leaders who utilize patronage, and eloquence to manipulate the public for the betterment of their kindred and supporters. It's all one big struggle for power. SNIP

What form of government does NOT fit this characterization, no matter how basic?

That was my point (and the point of political theory courses). I was just refuting the claims that democracy offered true equality and rights.

Avatar image for ristactionjakso
ristactionjakso

6118

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 39

User Lists: 0

#139 ristactionjakso
Member since 2011 • 6118 Posts

wow this post is still goin? I was gone all day.

Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#140 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"] In real life I agree with you, but in the very specific hypthothetical that was laid out, nobody can possibly lack for fish. Yeah, it's a pretty extreme hypothetical, and in my view ignores issues such as: if two people want the same apartment because it has the best view... you've taken away the ability to bid for that. I see no solution to that simple problem in any far future without artificial control. It is the artificial control which requires absolute centralized authority and leads to what you're talking about.

Still, lets say we've well and truly damaged the planet through nuclear war, or some other means and living conditions are uniform: you have as much space as you want, but you can't have a view because (insert scifi stuff here). If you have a closed society in which any person can go to a Star Trek -esque replicator for any kind of food or object... trade is meaningless. Why bother to fish if you can dial a perfect cut of salmon? In this hypothetical laid out, where truly free trade (in both senses) is the only thing left, then you have a functional communist society.

Personally, I find that I keep thinking of conflicts that would arise, requring strong central authority, but the fish notion is not the issue.Frame_Dragger

That scenario still wouldn't work, because somepeople would want to control things. And these people would turn into tyrants and we are right back at communism again. Even if we could make food like in Star Trek, someone would want to take control of that and limit it's uses for power and say that unless if you (insert whatever) than you can't get food from it. There would still be conflict and it wouldn't be a free society. Besides I'm sure people would still find a way to make a profit in one way or the other, it would just be the dictator running the show.

If one person in a world in which everyone has equal ability to produce wants control for its own sake, they would be contending with a populace that would almost certainly kill them ASAP. I don't think that people with mental defects existing is a valid argument against any form of government. No rational person would want control over everything, if they can't possibly gain any more than they already have by doing so. the number of people who want to control other for JUST the sake of control is small enough that you just hit the "gun" button on your replicator and the community solves its problem.

All it would take is for some people to start drawing lines, it doesn't have to be over resources. They would find something else to fight or desire over like men/women they want to marry, someone questioning things, someone wanting to live a different kind of life ect...

What you are describing is a fantasy where everyone get's along and no one would fight and there would be no need to compete on a grand scale because there would be no reason to improve since life would be be perfect and thus no one would feel the need to. They would be perfectly contempt with everything they have and there would be nothing left to improve since everything is perfect.

It's a fantasy, it's impossible and that would never happen. ever. In a real life scenerio people would become dictators and hurt oppress others, or people would compete in other ways thourgh trading services or whatnot. In real life, in your fantasy land it can exist. But not in real life.

Avatar image for Chargeagles1
Chargeagles1

1711

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#141 Chargeagles1
Member since 2006 • 1711 Posts

wow this post is still goin? I was gone all day.

ristactionjakso

Sensationalism (almost to the point of libel) apparently gets people's attention.

Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#142 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

wow this post is still goin? I was gone all day.

ristactionjakso

lol it's my fault sorry. When I show up in any thread it becomes heated and starts to go forver :P

Avatar image for ristactionjakso
ristactionjakso

6118

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 39

User Lists: 0

#143 ristactionjakso
Member since 2011 • 6118 Posts

lol thats fine. Ill just continue to read new posts :)

Avatar image for soulless4now
soulless4now

41388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#144 soulless4now
Member since 2003 • 41388 Posts

Good luck with that. I don't see that happening.

Avatar image for MgamerBD
MgamerBD

17550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#145 MgamerBD
Member since 2006 • 17550 Posts

I was hoping this was true. We don't need the second amendment anymore. I'm also tired of these gun nuts correlating statistics.

Avatar image for Palantas
Palantas

15329

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#146 Palantas
Member since 2002 • 15329 Posts

I was hoping this was true. We don't need the second amendment anymore. I'm also tired of these gun nuts correlating statistics.

MgamerBD

I know. Research can be a motherf***er when it disagrees with your opinions.

Also: Just so we're clear, you were hoping that the President was going to declare an article of the Constitution void? That right?

Avatar image for weezyfb
weezyfb

14703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#147 weezyfb
Member since 2009 • 14703 Posts
Misleading and sensationalist... yup
Avatar image for MgamerBD
MgamerBD

17550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#148 MgamerBD
Member since 2006 • 17550 Posts

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]

I was hoping this was true. We don't need the second amendment anymore. I'm also tired of these gun nuts correlating statistics.

Palantas

I know. Research can be a motherf***er when it disagrees with your opinions.

Also: Just so we're clear, you were hoping that the President was going to declare an article of the Constitution void? That right?

Well parts of the Constitution have been voided before. Such as the three fifths(3/5) amendment dealing with the slaves. But I was hoping the president would do it. Even though the president does not have that much power. I one day hope that 2nd amendment will be banned or at least restricted to where people cannot buy automatic rifles(semi automatic? I don't know which rifle).
Avatar image for coolbeans90
coolbeans90

21305

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#149 coolbeans90
Member since 2009 • 21305 Posts

There is no way clicking on one of these topics can end well. Either it's true and I'm pissed, or it's sensationalistic bull spit anything and I'm pissed. I assumed it was the latter, taking into consideration the topic creator, and was correct.

FREEDOM.

Avatar image for coolbeans90
coolbeans90

21305

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#150 coolbeans90
Member since 2009 • 21305 Posts

[QUOTE="Palantas"]

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]

I was hoping this was true. We don't need the second amendment anymore. I'm also tired of these gun nuts correlating statistics.

MgamerBD

I know. Research can be a motherf***er when it disagrees with your opinions.

Also: Just so we're clear, you were hoping that the President was going to declare an article of the Constitution void? That right?

Well parts of the Constitution have been voided before. Such as the three fifths(3/5) amendment dealing with the slaves. But I was hoping the president would do it. Even though the president does not have that much power. I one day hope that 2nd amendment will be banned or at least restricted to where people cannot buy automatic rifles(semi automatic? I don't know which rifle).

Semi-automatic rifles account for less than 5% of gun deaths. But as long as we're supporting dictatorial mandates, alright then.