The recession in Brazil - lessons to be learned?

Originally posted by generalissimo
So you're going to be selective about questions because you can't answer some of them.

No. I'm just not going to waste my time on every single one of your insignificant little "posts for posting's sake". While some people here are quite capable of asking me questions I cannot really answer, you - generalissimo - let me assure you, are not one of them.

Originally posted by generalissimo
yes, the government sets the rules, and should have owndership of some facilities in order to care for those who cannot afford to go private. However, it would be a generalisation to label it all as "synergy between socialism and capitalism"...

... However, it would be a generalisation to label it all as "synergy between socialism and capitalism", government interference varies from country to country, some (like the US) have less interference than the UK (for example), which makes some more capitalist than others, the majority of countries could be described as a functioning capitalist country.

It's not a generalisation. It is a description of reality that applies to all democracies. You cut the word "compromises" I notice. But I don't really care if you're trying to misrepresent me in your response. What does it really matter after all?

Just because the US shares some of the features found in socialist countries doesn't mean the US is just another social democracy variant ...

It absolutely does. Sorry. I even explained exactly why it does. You have simply contradicted it. Good for you.

the differences are huge between the US and N.Korea for example.

What has N.Korea got to do with "social democracy" and "capitalism", or even "democracy"? This makes you look very very foolish generalissimo.

the US could still be considered an example of a functioning capitalist system, because the degree of intervention is still small if compared to other countries in europe or asia.

I disagree. The degree of intervention in the U.S. is plenty big enough for us to be able to say that all democracies, including the U.S., callibrate and settle on their own compromises and balance between elements of "socialism" and elements of "capitalism". It's a nonsense to define "capitalism" as whatever the "most capitalistic" system is like. It's also nonsense to ignore, as eljefejesus does, what the U.S. brand of "capitalism" did to Latin America for a century or two and then downplay the enormous significance of social democracy replacing U.S. payrolled junta and death squads.

There is no fully functioning pure "capitalist" system up and running in the world today. Everything out there (at least among the democracies) is effectively a social democracy of one degree or another.

Originally posted by FMF
No. I'm just not going to waste my time on every single one of your insignificant little "posts for posting's sake". While some people here are quite capable of asking me questions I cannot really answer, you - generalissimo - let me assure you, are not one of them.

cut the crap FMF, just admit you can't answer my questions.

there is no need to hide behind that holier-than-thou position.

Originally posted by generalissimo
cut the crap FMF, just admit you can't answer my questions.

I did. Read it. Respond or ignore. Other than that, your macho-poster things is a turkey.

Originally posted by FMF
[b] ... However, it would be a generalisation to label it all as "synergy between socialism and capitalism", government interference varies from country to country, some (like the US) have less interference than the UK (for example), which makes some more capitalist than others, the majority of countries could be described as a functioning capitalist country.[/b ...[text shortened]... cracies) is effectively a social democracy of one degree or another.

It's not a generalisation

yes, it is.

It is a description of reality that applies to all democracies.

not necessarily.

What has N.Korea got to do with "social democracy" and "capitalism", or even "democracy"?

I used n.korea as an example of a place where there is litte economic freedom.

Originally posted by generalissimo
[b]It's not a generalisation

yes, it is.

It is a description of reality that applies to all democracies.

not necessarily.

What has N.Korea got to do with "social democracy" and "capitalism", or even "democracy"?

I used n.korea as an example of a place where there is litte economic freedom.[/b]

"yes it is". "Not necessariloy". Mere gainsay. Nadiresque. You are unable to keep your composure.

And what has N.Korea got to do with our discussion?

Originally posted by FMF
I disagree. The degree of intervention in the U.S. is plenty big enough for us to be able to say that all democracies, including the U.S., callibrate and settle on their own compromises and balance between elements of "socialism" and elements of "capitalism". It's a nonsense to define "capitalism" as whatever the "most capitalistic" system is like. It's also nonse ...[text shortened]... ormous significance of social democracy replacing U.S. payrolled junta and death squads.

Yes, the US has elements of socialism, but it is a gross generalisation to claim it is at the same level as venezuela (example).

It's a nonsense to define "capitalism" as whatever the "most capitalistic" system is like.

so what are you suppose to say? could you say that the country with most economic freedom is the most capitalistic?

It's also nonsense to ignore, as eljefejesus does, what the U.S. brand of "capitalism" did to Latin America for a century or two and then downplay the enormous significance of social democracy replacing U.S. payrolled junta and death squads.

Does eljefejesus ignore US influence on latin america?
How exactly does social democracy repel death squads?

Originally posted by FMF
"yes it is". "Not necessariloy". Mere gainsay. Nadiresque. You are unable to keep your composure.

And what has N.Korea got to do with our discussion?

"yes it is". "Not necessariloy". Mere gainsay. Nadiresque. You are unable to keep your composure.

so what?


And what has N.Korea got to do with our discussion?

I told you, it was an example of a place where there is little economic freedom.

Originally posted by generalissimo
[b]And what has N.Korea got to do with our discussion?

I told you, it was an example of a place where there is little economic freedom.[/b]

And what has N.Korea got to do with our discussion?

Originally posted by generalissimo
the US has elements of socialism, but it is a gross generalisation to claim it is at the same level as venezuela

Where did I say this?

Originally posted by generalissimo
How exactly does social democracy repel death squads?

I don't know my little sausage. Have you read any books?

Originally posted by FMF
Where did I say this?

you implied it.

after all, according to you its all just "synegy between capitalism and socialism".

Originally posted by FMF
I don't know my little sausage. Have you read any books?

Yes, I have read books.

So, you admit that your claim was false, social democracy is not = no death squads, because the two things aren't even related.

Originally posted by generalissimo
So, you admit that your claim was false, social democracy is not = no death squads, because the two things aren't even related.

I have no idea what you are on about.

Originally posted by FMF
I have no idea what you are on about.

Originally posted by FMF
the enormous significance of social democracy replacing U.S. payrolled junta and death squads.

thats what Im talking about.