Lyndon Johnson allowed 50,000 Americans to die in Viet Nam for his own political purposes. He may be as close to an evil man as we have seen in the 20th Century in America.
While I certainly agree that the capitalistic approach has proven itself, the collapse of the USSR had nothing to do with that system not being viable or being inferior (I don't think it was, at least not in the ideas, in execution - maybe). Yes, system wasn't inferior it was completely fucked up and your kind infested with that shit half Europe. Your dumb system ripped off my country among others, screwed up economies, people etc. the collapse of the USSR had nothing to do with that system not being viable or being inferior Are you fucking nuts?? What a crap. The problem is that lots of people in the West actually still believe such a freaking non-sense. Considering where I come from and that you are a Russian makes your rattling highly offensive!!
Doesn't get much more inaccurate than this. That's the beauty of American free speech and expression though. You can believe, and even say whatever you like. RS7
How can you talk about people who are evil and forget to include Bert from Sesame Street. All the details and pictures can be found here. http://www.spacecat.com/bert/bert.htm Chuck
Yup, we have been remiss. Horrible day trading for me. Had C overnight, along with some other assorted garbage, like MSFT and AXP and IBM. Oh well, think I will have a long weekend and regroup. And stop taking overnights for a while. Hurt me badly this week. Good luck to all, RS7
First of all, I'M NOT RUSSIAN! I'm Ukrainain, Russia did a LOT of bad things to Ukraine too (the starvation to 1933 is an extreme example). Secondly, gee, let me guess, you must be from Chech Republic or Poland or somewhere close Yes, we did strip your country of resources after the war. But what the F#$% were we supposed to do? We saved your butts from Hitler and althogh the west did chip in in the effort, you have to admit the brunt of it in terms of the cost and lives went to the USSR. The country was in such a mess economically, that if Churchil had his way, the coalition could take us over. We were vulnerable b/c we paid a high price during the war. Was there much help being offered from other countries to help us rebuild the economy? Nothing. Instead, Churchill kept yelling that the West should take this opportunity to squelch the Soviets b/c of how weak they were. We had to urgently rebuild the economy and considering what we did for you, instead of being so f#cking bitter, you should be thankful, moron. And NO, it was not inferior. The people in charge screwed up, just like they could have screwed up in any other country. So suck it up and move on loser.
A trader defending communism? Great googly mooglies. Just do me one favor. Read 'The Road to Serfdom' by F.A. Hayek. Please. I'm begging you.
Dark, I don't read this to be about defending communism. Unless I misunderstand, he was talking about the ideals of socialism and that they have merit. Which in theory has some validity. But, in practical terms, it has certainly proven to be an unachievable goal. I believe it is the nature of man to want to be rewarded one way or another for effort. In a socialist society, this breeds corruption. And power. And you know what they say about the combination of the two. It is bad enough in a free enterprise society. It is so much worse in a closed system. Greed, resentment, and the attempted inclusion of too many cultures ruined the USSR (and Reagan thinking Mars was going to attack us, as I already explained)