CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Society › Politics › Close to Politics › What if Donald Trump was President and George Santos was a Cabinet Secretary?

What if Donald Trump was President and George Santos was a Cabinet Secretary?

Started by Bryan Booth · · 👁 9 views · 124 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Bryan BoothSamuel KernMark Lopez8Grace Wood5crimsonwolf20Sophia Moore52Ryan Carter3neonhound18bluerider63Gregory Peterson2rowdytiger13Hannah White57rustywalker1Paul Thomas46Christian Wilson7Timothy Castillo6Keith Miller30Michelle Doyle61Sean Fox60Patrick Thomas29Harold Martin10goldenpuma84goldenstag15Jack Torres2
Sophia Moore52 Sophia Moore52 Active Member
95 messages
joined Oct 2016
#61 ·
Christian Wilson7 said:To the Republicans, even Obama counts as a socialist. But honestly, their economic arguments don't hold water because the government footprint and bureaucracy there are kept to an absolute minimum—the state hardly ever interferes. They use tax revenue to fund robust social safety nets while letting a massive private sector drive everything. In those countries, huge private corporations are actually the backbone of the economy, not endless layers of government bureaucrats.

The forum seems to be acting up a bit.

Even in socialism, the state is supposed to wither away—that’s actually the end goal. What you're calling socialism, like the USSR, is really just state capitalism...
Christian Wilson7 Christian Wilson7 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Jan 2015
#62 ·
Sophia Moore52 said:Even in socialism, the state is supposed to wither away—that’s actually the end goal. What you're calling socialism, like the USSR, is really just state capitalism...

How can a country truly be considered socialist if its entire economy is built on private corporations, much like what we see in Scandinavia?
Sophia Moore52 Sophia Moore52 Active Member
95 messages
joined Oct 2016
#63 ·
Christian Wilson7 said:How can a country truly be considered socialist if its entire economy is built on private corporations, much like what we see in Scandinavia?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ises_of_Sweden

Do a quick Google search on how Norway manages its oil profits...
Hannah White57 Hannah White57 Member
10 messages
joined Feb 2018
#64 ·
Mark Lopez8 said:Out of all those politicians who have been loitering around the American political scene for decades, this one newcomer is the only one who actually hit the nail on the head. Joining the European Union and NATO was a massive mistake; the US lost its sovereignty because of those associations. Second, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are essentially two sides of the same coin—they're the ones who ruined this country. Third, and most importantly, corruption and crime are baked into every single government institution. I'm talking about the Department of Justice, the courts, and everything under them. It’s no wonder this whole place feels like a total circus destined for poverty and struggle when there isn't even anyone left to prosecute the criminals.👎

I totally disagree that joining the European Union and NATO was a mistake. Look, right now, the EU is the main club that everyone in Europe—and even some folks outside of it—is trying to get into. Even though it has plenty of flaws (trust me, it does), there’s just no real alternative out there. It’s not the EU's fault that we don't know how to properly use grant money without grabbing a slice for ourselves, and it's definitely not their fault that we have a culture of corruption.

As for NATO, it's a defense alliance. I honestly don't get why anyone would find membership in that group problematic. It’s not like our soldiers are out there dying in every corner of the globe. Most of the time, we're just providing support or handling training missions, while leaving the heavy military lifting to the USA and the rest of the big players. So, I really don't see how joining that alliance was a "mistake."

Now, regarding the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, and their constant looting—let's do some quick math. Add up all the members of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. Then throw in all their little satellite parties and sidekick groups... then add up all their family members, everyone who got rich through connections to these politicians, and every corrupt official in the civil service... what do you end up with?

You realize that a huge chunk of the population is somehow tied to the corruption. It’s like, more or less, everyone is cheating the system in one way or another. Some people dodge taxes, others live in houses that aren't even legal, and then there's this person and that person... Look, we need to use our heads. If we want to change things, we have to start by changing our own lifestyles and habits first. Through referendums and actual civic pressure, we can slowly fix the system. We shouldn't be bowing down to nonsense or waiting around for some Messiah to swoop in and pull us out of hell and into paradise. Honestly, our people need a serious wake-up call to stop whining about their fate and pointing fingers at everyone else being a thief. We need to take an honest look in the mirror and admit that, as a nation, we are politically illiterate and completely checked out.
Christian Wilson7 Christian Wilson7 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Jan 2015
#65 ·
Sophia Moore52 said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ises_of_Sweden

Do a quick Google search on how Norway manages its oil profits...

Now, why don't you give me a list of private corporations? If you look at the Wikipedia entry on the Swedish economy (under the "see also" section), it actually mentions this: Approximately 90% of all resources and companies are privately owned, with a minority of 5% owned by the state and another 5% operating as either consumer or producer cooperatives.

We're starting to drift off-topic here.
crimsonwolf20 crimsonwolf20 Active Member
82 messages
joined Apr 2016
#66 ·
Christian Wilson7 said:Now, why don't you give me a list of private corporations? If you look at the Wikipedia entry on the Swedish economy (under the "see also" section), it actually mentions this: Approximately 90% of all resources and companies are privately owned, with a minority of 5% owned by the state and another 5% operating as either consumer or producer cooperatives.

We're starting to drift off-topic here.

Honestly, Karl Marx would probably be beaming with pride looking at those Swedish proletarians and their whole struggle against capitalism 🤣

Man, if only we had a version of "socialism" like that! Imagine if we actually had our own versions of IKEA, AT&T, Ford, Whirlpool, John Deere, Verizon, Axis... plus 22 billionaires to boot ☕
Sophia Moore52 Sophia Moore52 Active Member
95 messages
joined Oct 2016
#67 ·
Christian Wilson7 said:Now, why don't you give me a list of private corporations? If you look at the Wikipedia entry on the Swedish economy (under the "see also" section), it actually mentions this: Approximately 90% of all resources and companies are privately owned, with a minority of 5% owned by the state and another 5% operating as either consumer or producer cooperatives.

We're starting to drift off-topic here.

Christian Wilson7 said:How can a country truly be considered socialist if its entire economy is built on private corporations, much like what we see in Scandinavia?


It seems our definitions of the word "exclusively" are quite different...

☕
crimsonwolf20 crimsonwolf20 Active Member
82 messages
joined Apr 2016
#68 ·
Oh, come on, please—having the government grab a 5% stake in everything is basically the end goal of socialism! 🤣
Sophia Moore52 Sophia Moore52 Active Member
95 messages
joined Oct 2016
#69 ·
crimsonwolf20 said:Oh, come on, please—having the government grab a 5% stake in everything is basically the end goal of socialism! 🤣

Actually, the true aim of socialism is 0% state ownership. After all, how can the government own anything if the state doesn't even exist?

☕
Timothy Castillo6 Timothy Castillo6 Active Member
148 messages
joined Apr 2010
#70 ·
If we were being completely honest, this government would be called "The Hallucinogenic Circus," and frankly, they wouldn't be any more or less successful than the bunch that came before them:
President noneThat’s the only kind of person you want sitting in the Oval Office.
Vice President and Secretary of State Joe BidenOnce you've already tanked once, you might as well go for a second round.
Vice President for Social Affairs and Secretary of Social Policy and Youth noneLet him try to socialize and revolutionize absolutely everyone and everything.
Secretary of Regional Development and European Union Funds noneWe definitely need someone eloquent and agile for a role like this.
Secretary of the Department of Justice noneJust so we can see which delinquent or communist shows up on the streets.
Secretary of the Treasury noneLet him just print money and enjoy the ride.
Secretary of Defense noneSpend half the day at the Pentagon and the other half working for private security.
Secretary of Health noneHe needs to build himself another little house, and honestly, this is the only way to do it.
Secretary of Justice noneA justice system with zero influence—that's the dream.
Secretary of Administration noneLet him just manage things; it's a position perfectly suited to his tastes.
Secretary of Commerce noneConstant clashes with everyone around him while GDP grows every single day according to his own analysis.
Secretary of Small Business noneSmall businesses are booming—it's been two days and they're already thriving.
Secretary of Labor and Pensions noneLet him stay put, he's actually pretty cool.
Secretary of Transportation and Infrastructure noneUnderwater tunnels everywhere you look, along with the regular ones too.
Secretary of Science, Education, and Sports noneSince he hasn't drained the swamp yet, let him keep at it.
Secretary of Agriculture noneHe hasn't finished peeling all the potatoes yet, so he might as well finish the job.
Secretary of Tourism noneHe has to make it out to San Francisco at least once; it's not fair that he's only been there once.
Secretary of Environmental Protection noneLet her keep fighting those wind turbines.
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development noneHe’s done a bit of building, so let him keep on building...
Secretary of Veterans Affairs noneI'm asking for a PhD level approach here.
Secretary of Culture noneYou'll see an incident at every single performance, yet the theaters remain packed to capacity.
crimsonwolf20 crimsonwolf20 Active Member
82 messages
joined Apr 2016
#71 ·
Sophia Moore52 said:Actually, the true aim of socialism is 0% state ownership. After all, how can the government own anything if the state doesn't even exist?

☕

🤣

So wait—are you actually saying socialists are all about 100% private ownership of the means of production? 😵😵
Sophia Moore52 Sophia Moore52 Active Member
95 messages
joined Oct 2016
#72 ·
crimsonwolf20 said:🤣

So wait—are you actually saying socialists are all about 100% private ownership of the means of production? 😵😵

No, they want social ownership...
Keith Miller30 Keith Miller30 Regular
328 messages
joined Aug 2014
#73 ·
Bryan Booth said:Just try to wrap your head around this scenario for a second: what if, after the next election, we end up with Donald Trump as Prime Minister and George Santos running the Treasury? Imagine the absolute chaos that would look like.

It would likely unfold as something somewhere between a psychological horror, a heavy drama, and a dark comedy.
Sophia Moore52 Sophia Moore52 Active Member
95 messages
joined Oct 2016
#74 ·
Keith Miller30 said:It would likely unfold as something somewhere between a psychological horror, a heavy drama, and a dark comedy.

I doubt it, since that would imply everything stays exactly the same as it is now...

☕
Keith Miller30 Keith Miller30 Regular
328 messages
joined Aug 2014
#75 ·
Sophia Moore52 said:I doubt it, since that would imply everything stays exactly the same as it is now...

☕

You see, I wouldn't say you aren't right.
crimsonwolf20 crimsonwolf20 Active Member
82 messages
joined Apr 2016
#76 ·
Sophia Moore52 said:No, they want social ownership...

State ownership, also called public ownership, government ownership or state property, are property interests that are vested in the state, rather than an individual or private entity.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_ownership

Look, even if you try to split "society" and "the state" into two different things, social ownership basically boils down to government ownership—at least according to everything we see in theory and practice! Honestly, you’re totally free to start a business based on those socialist principles whenever you want, so why not just go ahead and prove this model is actually better? Why try to force everyone else to run their businesses that way through sheer coercion? If it were truly superior, people would jump on board voluntarily—but they don't! The only way anyone gets that kind of management style to work is by forcing it on them.

Anyway, in Sweden, 90% is in private hands, while only about 5% is considered "social"—yet you keep stubbornly calling all of that "socialism"🤦
Sophia Moore52 Sophia Moore52 Active Member
95 messages
joined Oct 2016
#77 ·
crimsonwolf20 said:State ownership, also called public ownership, government ownership or state property, are property interests that are vested in the state, rather than an individual or private entity.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_ownership

Look, even if you try to split "society" and "the state" into two different things, social ownership basically boils down to government ownership—at least according to everything we see in theory and practice! Honestly, you’re totally free to start a business based on those socialist principles whenever you want, so why not just go ahead and prove this model is actually better? Why try to force everyone else to run their businesses that way through sheer coercion? If it were truly superior, people would jump on board voluntarily—but they don't! The only way anyone gets that kind of management style to work is by forcing it on them.

Anyway, in Sweden, 90% is in private hands, while only about 5% is considered "social"—yet you keep stubbornly calling all of that "socialism"🤦


You seem to forget that over half of that private wealth gets funneled right back into the government treasury via taxes... and since social and state ownership aren't identical like you claim, why don't you try starting a government-run company yourself? 😁
Paul Thomas46 Paul Thomas46 Active Member
101 messages
joined Jan 2018
#78 ·
Sophia Moore52 said:Interesting approach... you listed all these nations with strong social safety nets, yet you completely ignored Somalia as the ultimate example of pure capitalism... tsk, tsk

Since when did socialism become the direct opposite of capitalism?
I'm listening 🙂

And by the way... Somalia? 🤦
Paul Thomas46 Paul Thomas46 Active Member
101 messages
joined Jan 2018
#79 ·
Mark Lopez8 said:I have some of my parents' old friends who spent decades living in Sweden, but they always came back to visit us during the summer, even back in the old days. Let me tell you, those folks were more hungry than full in Sweden. Sure, they drove decent cars, but they were always baffled by how well people lived back in the old country. They used to stare at our breakfasts in total disbelief; they barely ate anything all day, whereas in our neck of the woods, summers meant family and friends everywhere. We'd have a table overflowing with everything—cured meats, cheeses, sausages, steak—just for breakfast. It was a feast!😁
I’ve traveled through Germany and seen what Germans eat for breakfast: a little biscuit with a bit of butter and then a mad dash to work. It’s the exact same story in the Netherlands; I have plenty of friends out West. Nobody—and I mean absolutely nobody—brags about how great life is over there. Everyone is drowning in debt and pinching pennies just to afford a vacation back home. Personally, I spend way more than the people visiting on holiday. So, go ahead, keep fantasizing about that "perfect life" in the Benelux or Scandinavia. In reality, maybe 10% of the people live well there, which is pretty much the same situation we have here.

poor souls 🙂

What's this all about breakfast? Is that really supposed to be an indicator of wealth? 😁
Mark Lopez8 Mark Lopez8 Member
25 messages
joined May 2014
#80 ·
Paul Thomas46 said:poor souls 🙂

What's this all about breakfast? Is that really supposed to be an indicator of wealth? 😁

It’s more about hunger than being full—just this constant craving for everything. You see people driving around in nice cars they’re drowning in debt for, working all year just to afford a single month of vacation here in the States. I don't know what kind of Western luxury everyone keeps dreaming about; most people are just barely scraping by.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads