For 333 - Our Resident Commie Hunter

[Straw Man]

straw ? what are anti capitalist progressives trying to progress to?

what is an anti-capitalist progressive

there is not even a progressive party

I have no clue what you're even so afraid about?

[BodyProSite]

not afraid  just wondering,  an anti capitalist progressive is a progressive that is against a capitalist system, more than half of obammers staff openly admit that they do not want capitalism in america, they also call themselves progressives.  so my question is if not capitalist, what is it that they want america to progress to?

[Straw Man]

not afraid  just wondering,  an anti capitalist progressive is a progressive that is against a capitalist system, more than half of obammers staff openly admit that they do not want capitalism in america, they also call themselves progressives.  so my question is if not capitalist, what is it that they want america to progress to?

I've never heard of an anti-capitalist progressive

did you make up that term

[BodyProSite]

nope i have heard it used and read it many times,  nevermind that straw  what is it that progressives are trying to progress to? its not capitalism they openly admit that,    why are you dodging that question?

[Straw Man]

nope i have heard it used and read it many times,  nevermind that straw  what is it that progressives are trying to progress to? its not capitalism they openly admit that,    why are you dodging that question?

I'm not a member of a progressive party or group so I have no idea what they are progressing towards.  Where are the statements where they "openly admit" things as you say.

Why not just post them and answer your own question

[Soul Crusher]

I'm not a member of a progressive party or group so I have no idea what they are progressing towards.  Where are the statements where they "openly admit" things as you say.

Why not just post them and answer your own question

Straw - honestly bro - you are lost.  You posed a question to me which I answered many times. 

You phrased your question in a certain way.


NAME ONE ON THIS LIST THAT EVEN COMES CLOSE.   

You did not require that I prove all of them.  You only asked that I come close on one.  For that I have already and you lost.  Get over it.  your thread backfired on you miserably. 

[Soul Crusher]

Bump for Straw on No. 2 - 10.

[Straw Man]

Private Ownership IN REAL PROPERTY exists to the extent that you do what the government tells you.  

You NEVER asked me to prove or disprove this. You asked me to pick any of the ten that "even comes close".   If you want re-phrase your question, fine, the question, as written by you, is what it is.  

So yes, the government on every level is moving closer to abolishing private property via the things myself and everyone else has listed in the past 13 pages.  

I'm still on # 1

do you think we've come close to the Abolition of Property in Land?

I've shown you how private ownership has increased over the last 50 years.

You yourself said that the govert was giving away free money (not true but I know what you're referring to)

I've shown you how the government has institutions and programs in place to promote private ownership in real property (FHA and to a lesser extent Fannie/Freddie)

I've shown you that the government has programs in place to help homeowners keep their property (Making Home Affordable program)

so #1 has not happened and more importantly IS NOT EVEN CLOSE

to be clear WE ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO ABOLISHING PRIVATE OWNERSHIP in real estate

if we can agree on those points I'll move on to your made up definition of "ownership" and show you why it's moronic and has no legal leg to stand on  (you know, the profession you claim to be in) and then we can move on to #2

I won't move on until we resolve #1 but I am prepared to go to #2 when we finish this one

[SAMSON123]

...

[Soul Crusher]

...

Ha ha.  Hysterical. 

No. 1 is going in circles.  Straw is a mile wide and an inch deep on this issue since his limited capacity for understanding does not allow him to understand the points that all but him have been making. 

No one has argued that private property is outlawed.  The argument is that your private property rights have been greatly dilluted and infringed upon by the government to the point where you may own the property in some senses, but overall, and in reality, you dont own shit.  The reasons why have been exhausted in this thread, and I am going to deal with No. 2 since Straw is intent of clinging to his hypertechnical definition of a word that does not comport with the overall reality that you really dont own shit when the govt can take "your land" after having paid off your mortgage for failure to pay property taxes, not abiding by zoning, green nonsense, etc.   

[Straw Man]

No one has argued that private property is outlawed.  The argument is that your private property rights have been greatly dilluted and infringed upon by the government to the point where you may own the property in some senses, but overall, and in reality, you dont own shit. .   

and I've shown you why that argument is complete nonsense

1.  eminent domain has been in existence since the beginning of this country and is used so infrequently (especially by the Federal Government) as to be no threat to anyone

2.  You claim erroneously that if you have to pay property taxes then the Govt (again you don't even pay property taxes to the Federal Govt) must be your partners but if you tried to make that claim in a court of law you'd be laughed out of the building.   The property rights you have are granted and enforced by the state and they have every right to collect taxes, enforce building codes, etc..

3.  I've given you ample proof that private ownership in real property has grown, has been promoted by the Government through the availability of highly leveraged financing and other government programs, etc..

All of the above are statement of FACT

Everyone on this board knows them to be true

The only thing you have is your bitching and moaning about property tax which is something the state and county have every right to collect (see above) and which you knew about before you purchased the property

Again - the question was (as you've pointed out) "even come close" to abolishing real property in land and you've shown me nothing that even comes close and I've told you why.  Feel free to address my arguments  or point out anything I've said above which is not true

[Soul Crusher]

and I've shown you why that argument is complete nonsense

1.  eminent domain has been in existence since the beginning of this country and is used so infrequently (especially by the Federal Government) as to be no threat to anyone

2.  You claim erroneously that if you have to pay property taxes then the Govt (again you don't even pay property taxes to the Federal Govt) must be your partners but if you tried to make that claim in a court of law you'd be laughed out of the building.   The property rights you have are granted and enforced by the state and they have every right to collect taxes, enforce building codes, etc..

3.  I've given you ample proof that private ownership in real property has grown, has been promoted by the Government through the availability of highly leveraged financing and other government programs, etc..

All of the above are statement of FACT

Everyone on this board knows them to be true

The only thing you have is your bitching and moaning about property tax which is something the state and county have every right to collect (see above) and which you knew about before you purchased the property

Again - the question was (as you've pointed out) "even come close" to abolishing real property in land and you've shown me nothing that even comes close and I've told you why.  Feel free to address my arguments  or point out anything I've said above which is not true

Bro - no one has claimed we are a communist nation yet.  You decided to latch on to what might be perhaps the weakest of the 10 things you listed when you and everyone else knows that there are others much closer than No. 1. 

I have argued, and everyone agrees but you that your private property rights are greatly being dilluted.  The govt will wipe its ass with your stupid deed if you dont do what it wants. 

 

[Straw Man]

Bro - no one has claimed we are a communist nation yet.  You decided to latch on to what might be perhaps the weakest of the 10 things you listed when you and everyone else knows that there are others much closer than No. 1. 

I have argued, and everyone agrees but you that your private property rights are greatly being dilluted.  The govt will wipe its ass with your stupid deed if you dont do what it wants. 

I didn't latch on to #1.  It's simply first on the list and I directly addressed your arguments.

the list is of 10 things that must come to pass from the transition from capitalism to communism.

#1 has not come to pass and is not even close (which was my question) and in fact has grown steadily in the opposite direction

those are all FACTS

your bitching about property tax and your feeling that your private property rights is not the question though I've addressed those as well and again, they are nonsense and I've told you why and you've failed to refute them.

If you have such a problem with that state which grants and enforces your property rights also charging your property tax and enforcing building codes, etc.. then why did you choose to purchase property in the first place.  Again, this is a completelty separate discussion from the questions about which this thread is based but I'm willing to entertain it.

On the question of are we even close to the ABOLITION of private ownerwhip of real property you fail

[Soul Crusher]

No its not just taxes, read the damn thread. 

Its the increasing control over the terms of your "ownership" that we have been discussing via not only taxes, but the expansive scope of eminent domain, expansive scope of zoning, "green" laws, etc.   

BTW, as far as all those programs you listed, yeah that worked out great didnt it?  Those wonderful programs only helped lead us to fiscal ruin and bankruptcy.

The question you need to ask yourself is whether you are gaining more control over "your" property or losing control over what to do with your property and where that is going in the whole scheme of things. 
 

[Straw Man]

No its not just taxes, read the damn thread. 

Its the increasing control over the terms of your "ownership" that we have been discussing via not only taxes, but the expansive scope of eminent domain, expansive scope of zoning, "green" laws, etc.   

emminent domain has been around forever and I'm more likely to be struck by lightening than lose my home to eminent domain.  Further on that point, the governmen is the one that grants and enforces property rights so it's hard to justify that they don't have the right of emminent domain, especially since it's in the Constitution since the founding of the country.

You seem to think that once you purchase property that you're some sovereign country existing within the USA and that your property rights supercede the very entity which grants and enforces those rights

BTW, as far as all those programs you listed, yeah that worked out great didnt it?  Those wonderful programs only helped lead us to fiscal ruin and bankruptcy.

irrelevent to the topic - go back and read the question

The question you need to ask yourself is whether you are gaining more control over "your" property or losing control over what to do with your property and where that is going in the whole scheme of things.  

nothing changed for me since the day I purchased my property and I went in knowing the rules fo the game which I presume you did too

[Soul Crusher]

emminent domain has been around forever and I'm more likely to be struck by lightening than lose my home to eminent domain.  Further on that point, the governmen is the one that grants and enforces property rights so it's hard to justify that they don't have the right of emminent domain, especially since it's in the Constitution since the founding of the country.

You seem to think that once you purchase property that you're some sovereign country existing within the USA and that your property rights supercede the very entity which grants and enforces those rights
 irrelevent to the topic - go back and read the question

nothing changed for me since the day I purchased my property and I went in knowing the rules fo the game which I presume you did too

This is why you are a liberal idiot Straw - you are brain dead, don't read, dont comprehend, and have no ability whatsoever to see beyond the extremely narrow blinders of your left wing nonsense.

Did anyone argue that Eminent Domain was not here?  No.  Thats another STRAW MAN argument you made up. 

What has been discussed and pointed out is the expansive nature of eminent domain and the increasing justifications and purposes the government is using it for beyond what was originally envisioned.  Same with zoning, same with civil forfeiture, same with "green laws", same with property taxes, same with "environmental" laws mandating what you can and cant do with your property etc, all acting to increasing dillute what it means to "own" your property.     

Of course that concept is greatly beyond your abilities, so look it up.     

[Straw Man]

This is why you are a liberal idiot Straw - you are brain dead, don't read, dont comprehend, and have no ability whatsoever to see beyond the extremely narrow blinders of your left wing nonsense.

translation = I don't share your paranoid delustion

Did anyone argue that Eminent Domain was not here?  No.  Thats another STRAW MAN argument you made up.  

where did I say it did not exist?  I've said it's ALWAYS existed, it's in the Constitution and it's justifiable and very very very very rarely used.  It's certainly no imminent threat to me and nothing I'm going to get panicked about (as you seem to be)

What has been discussed and pointed out is the expansive nature of eminent domain and the increasing justifications and purposes the government is using it for beyond what was originally envisioned.  Same with zoning, same with civil forfeiture, same with "green laws", same with property taxes, same with "environmental" laws mandating what you can and cant do with your property etc, all acting to increasing dillute what it means to "own" your property. Of course that concept is greatly beyond your abilities, so look it up.

I've already told you I don't agree with using it to enhance private party ownership but even that happens so rarely as to not be a real threat to anyone and certainly not proof that the govt is on the path the abolitioin of private property.  Shit all the  exampes granted the rights to yet another private property.  

All the things you're bitching about are things you knew about before you chose to purchase

Your arguments are akin to someone bitching that because they have a car they should be allowed to drive 100 mile an hour and on sidewalks and through parks

All your arguments do is show how untethered you are from reality which is something I suspect you have in common with many of your fellow TeaBaggers

[BodyProSite]

hey straw, dont pay tax on one single thing you think you own for a year or two and dont pay income tax, and wait and see what you really own after uncle sam is done with your ass,  deed or not

[BodyProSite]

i think that the term ownership needs to be discussed, cause that is what keeps this going in circles

[BodyProSite]

OWNERSHIP is the state or fact of EXCLUSIVE rights and control over property, which may be an object, land/real estate or intellectual property.

 When the govenment can come in and take anything that you did not give them your permission is not ownership, like i have said in the past
dont pay income tax- assets seized
dont pay proprty tax- booted out of house, and off land
dont register your car- gone, and you better hope you have enough extra money to pay to get it out of the pound or its permenently gone
in some stated park your car on an unpaved part of YOUR yard- gone
dont insure your vehicle- gone
dont mow your yard- get fined, go to jail
keep your dog on a chain- gone
keep too many cars in your driveway for too long- gone
need i post more straw?  I am sitting here looking at the code enforcement page on the net and the list they can do to you is rather lengthy, and i did compare it too a list from 1984 which was as far back as i could find right now and the list isnt half as long so that proves my point of evolution.
Just cause the government is creating programs to get people in houses does not mean these people own these houses, just as easy as the government put these people in, watch what happens if these people dont obide by the stipulations put on  them from this program, they are kicked out faster than they got put in.  And the simple fact that the government puts rules and regulation on the terms on which one can be incentivised into a home disprove ownership. I gave the definition of ownership above, and for the government to have say in the terms of how you occupy the property is not exclusive, therefore not ownership

[MRDUMPLING]

Once again...private property ownership is not going up. 

1.  I think this economy has proven that with the amount of foreclosures. 

2.  If you have a mortgage you don't own your home!  The bank does.  Keep thinking you do though Straw. 

[Soul Crusher]

Once again...private property ownership is not going up. 

1.  I think this economy has proven that with the amount of foreclosures. 

2.  If you have a mortgage you don't own your home!  The bank does.  Keep thinking you do though Straw. 

For gods' sake already - this whole thread is stalled cause Straw is intent on denying the obvious.  That's fine.  Lets agree to disagree on No 2 and go to No. 2 ok Straw?

[Straw Man]

i think that the term ownership needs to be discussed, cause that is what keeps this going in circles

it's pretty simple.

there is the legal definition and that's it

I'm the "on title" owner of my property ..... period

If you're confused in any way on that then consult an attorney (not a glorified bill collector like 333) and he/she will explain it to you.

Having to pay property tax and adhere to building codes, zoning laws, etc.. doesn't change the fact that I am the owner nor does it make the government a part owner, partner, etc....

everything else is just TeaBag induced paranoia and or just ordinary stupidity

[BodyProSite]

i just gave the definition of ownership  you cant spin that straw,  exclusive, control and rights,  if any other party has any say so its not exclusive, and therefore not ownership (any party including government) anything you own cant be taken unless its stolen illegally, however it is leagal for government to take your things,  i.e. not ownership. you cant change or spin the definition straw face it. sorry

[Straw Man]

i just gave the definition of ownership  you cant spin that straw,  exclusive, control and rights,  if any other party has any say so its not exclusive, and therefore not ownership (any party including government) anything you own cant be taken unless its stolen illegally, however it is leagal for government to take your things,  i.e. not ownership. you cant change or spin the definition straw face it. sorry

make up all the definitions that you'd like

I'm going to stick with the actual legal definition as that's the only one that actually matters

If you don't like eminent domain, or property taxes or zoning laws then you free to choose to not purchase property