Ever hear of OECD (Socialist mouthpiece)?

Dec 2018
2,555
1,541
Unionville Indiana
Trump is not a rapist. Do you have a record of his conviction of rape? To start an argument with a blatant lie is pretty stupid and shows your hate has you deranged and therefore irrelevant.
Your gullibility is duly noted. ‘I accused Donald Trump of sexual assault. Now I sleep with a loaded gun’

Is this another true story Fox & Friends refused to cover?



The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.—George Orwell 1984
 
  • Like
Reactions: se7en

imaginethat

Forum Staff
Oct 2010
69,534
29,444
Colorado
I saw the problem immediately. We're talking headquarters in.......FRANCE! When are those ooh-laa-laa people coming to get their statue back? That Torch Girl is just a pain in the patoot to our Trump supporters. Nothing but trouble.
Yup. And when the hell are they going to bring back American fries anyway?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007

imaginethat

Forum Staff
Oct 2010
69,534
29,444
Colorado
Stop lying in order to defend your rapist president. Trump is the country's leading disciple of of the dead Saul Alinsky and contemptible Roy Cohn. He targets and polarizes groups, as well as individuals, such as the media ("enemy of the people"), Mexicans/Central Americans seeking asylum ("rapists, drug dealers", etc.), Senate & House Democrats (unpatriotic "socialists"), and "sh!t hole" African countries, etc.

The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.—George Orwell
Donald Trump: 'What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening.'
 

imaginethat

Forum Staff
Oct 2010
69,534
29,444
Colorado
i have read, and reread my OP, and cannot find the word "liberal" anywhere. So this comment is - silly.


Your stereotyping has been noted. I take it I am one of the conservatives. I have been called many things. I will add "conservative" to "bleeding heart liberal" , and the various others.

So, am I to take it you self identify as a "budding young socialist"? That puts you under age thirty, probably a college student past or present, and strongly Socialist.
If you are not, I doubt you have first hand knowledge about OECD. Wait - quite a contradiction, from your statements.

Not nearly as much as your reply.
I've read this thread, and you haven't explained why the OECD is so terrible.
 
Aug 2019
305
32
USA
I've read this thread, and you haven't explained why the OECD is so terrible.
Here is my OP:

From my experience most budding Socialists get their "facts" (I use the term loosely) from OECD, mostly second hand.
i suspect some of them do not realize that, they just spout the propaganda they have been fed, without concerning themselves about the source.

So for Socialist supporters who do not know about OECD, what is your source of information that makes Socialism appear so appealing?

For those who accept OECD as reliable, what words of wisdom can you share? What do their statistics reveal, that demonstrates the superiority of Socialism?


Propaganda is a tool, amoral. It is information meant to convince or change the mind. The morality of its use comes from the one propagating it.

Often they takes a bit of fact, mix it with fantasy, and put it out. In the OP I hint that budding young socialists are accepting propaganda based on data supplied by OECD. This propaganda, as is often the case, has large doses of fantasy.

I ask questions, hoping for answers, that will start a discussion.
No answers came. No discussion resulting.
As to whether or not OECD is "terrible", it depends on whether or not you are a true believer (in Socialism). If you are, no harm in a bit of fairytale, to convince the undecided.

I never promised you a rose garden.
I have not failed to deliver anything promised in the OP.

The direction I wanted to go, was consideration of redistribution of wealth, and social welfare provided by nations, as indicated by OECD, and budding young socialists.

Hope that helps.
Also, I find the Socratic dialogue to to be effective, if that helps.
 

imaginethat

Forum Staff
Oct 2010
69,534
29,444
Colorado
Here is my OP:

From my experience most budding Socialists get their "facts" (I use the term loosely) from OECD, mostly second hand.
i suspect some of them do not realize that, they just spout the propaganda they have been fed, without concerning themselves about the source.


So for Socialist supporters who do not know about OECD, what is your source of information that makes Socialism appear so appealing?

For those who accept OECD as reliable, what words of wisdom can you share? What do their statistics reveal, that demonstrates the superiority of Socialism?

Propaganda is a tool, amoral. It is information meant to convince or change the mind. The morality of its use comes from the one propagating it.

Often they takes a bit of fact, mix it with fantasy, and put it out. In the OP I hint that budding young socialists are accepting propaganda based on data supplied by OECD. This propaganda, as is often the case, has large doses of fantasy.

I ask questions, hoping for answers, that will start a discussion.
No answers came. No discussion resulting.
As to whether or not OECD is "terrible", it depends on whether or not you are a true believer (in Socialism). If you are, no harm in a bit of fairytale, to convince the undecided.

I never promised you a rose garden.
I have not failed to deliver anything promised in the OP.

The direction I wanted to go, was consideration of redistribution of wealth, and social welfare provided by nations, as indicated by OECD, and budding young socialists.

Hope that helps.
Also, I find the Socratic dialogue to to be effective, if that helps.
Thank you.

Imo, a better form of government contains both capitalistic and socialistic elements. Finding the balance is a challenge.

Clearly, some applications of capitalism are obscene, such as healthcare for profit. Perhaps you can point out a specific application of socialism that is equally obscene.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BitterPill
Aug 2019
305
32
USA
Thank you.

Imo, a better form of government contains both capitalistic and socialistic elements. Finding the balance is a challenge.

Clearly, some applications of capitalism are obscene, such as healthcare for profit. Perhaps you can point out a specific application of socialism that is equally obscene.
What may be clear to you, is not at all obvious to others.

Here is what budding young Socialists have told me, referencing OECD as their source:
The USA and UK are among the worst when it comes to providing welfare benefits to citizens, and others in need.
They use the word "welfare", multiple times, multiple boards over many months.

Here is what OECD says.
They never use the word "welfare". They do rate nations on "social expenditures", which sounds very much like "welfare". It is closely related to redistribution of wealth.
Social expenditures is money (cash) that is transferred from the government, to individual citizens.
Clearly this does not include food stamps, Medicaid, free housing and utilities, university education, or any noncash welfare assistance. It also does not include shiploads of food and medicine given to developing nations.

It does include paychecks and retirement benefits for the military and government employees,as well as cash welfare. That is what OECD, and budding young socislist mean by redistribution of wealth.

Some people would say welfare programs are that capitalim-meets-socialism idea you mentioned. Turns out military pay is redistribution of wealth, but providing the necessities of life to those who choose poverty, is not.

Does this help?
 

imaginethat

Forum Staff
Oct 2010
69,534
29,444
Colorado
What may be clear to you, is not at all obvious to others.

Here is what budding young Socialists have told me, referencing OECD as their source:
The USA and UK are among the worst when it comes to providing welfare benefits to citizens, and others in need.
They use the word "welfare", multiple times, multiple boards over many months.

Here is what OECD says.
They never use the word "welfare". They do rate nations on "social expenditures", which sounds very much like "welfare". It is closely related to redistribution of wealth.
Social expenditures is money (cash) that is transferred from the government, to individual citizens.
Clearly this does not include food stamps, Medicaid, free housing and utilities, university education, or any noncash welfare assistance. It also does not include shiploads of food and medicine given to developing nations.

It does include paychecks and retirement benefits for the military and government employees,as well as cash welfare. That is what OECD, and budding young socislist mean by redistribution of wealth.

Some people would say welfare programs are that capitalim-meets-socialism idea you mentioned. Turns out military pay is redistribution of wealth, but providing the necessities of life to those who choose poverty, is not.

Does this help?
Do you believe that the capitalist model is free from redistribution of wealth?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BitterPill
Aug 2019
305
32
USA
Do you believe that the capitalist model is free from redistribution of wealth?
Too many loaded terms for me to deal with.

Capitalism means the government provides infrastructure for rich and poor alike, for the benefit of Business and consumers. Consumers who never produced one hour of labor, enjoy roads, public parks and libraries, fire and police, and much more. They enjoy wealth provided by others.
Maybe that helps.