Polls

There are male dominated sectors and female dominated sectors, BUT, men and women earn the same. A basic labourer can often earn more than his boss. Only 6% of your income is taxed. Unemployment is almost non-existent. Anyone who WANTS a job is guatanteed one by the government. Children are taught from a very young age that working is respectable. Employers get 4 weeks vacation time, and their companies even organize holidays for them, often to health spas run by the labour unions. Co-workers go for beer after each shift. Bosses help their employees with any problems they may be having, work related or personal. Overtime pay and bonuses still exist, even if you are on a pension. Certain sectors are honoured with public holidays.

There is no mass advertising. The best consumer goods are found only through word of mouth, forcing people to socialize. Speaking of socializing, local phone calls are free.

Some residents are given housing by the government, even those who aren't, pay very little, so homelessness is very low. Land is often owned by the government, but anything extra left over from production quota, the owner can eat or profit from. Those who want a car can get one from the government for low cost.

Children bring their teachers flowers on first day of school, and they also recieve gifts. The government helps them with enrolment fees for things like sports and arts. Schools also organize trips for students as a reward for good work, at no cost to them. Hard work is rewarded.

Healthcare and education costs very little out of pocket.

Crime is low. People are selfless, kind, joyous and sociable. Over 100 different ethnic groups all living in harmony. And there is strong emphasis on preserving cultural traditions.

Women see nothing but fake love on Instagram with girls being spoiled and provided for and they think it is real.

I have been with girls with traditional expectations despite not being traditional themselves (girls that cook, clean, submissive, been with very few men).

There is no accountability, women are also too stubborn to see how hypocritical it is. They are looking for a husband and not willing to be a wife.

Meals would be dependant on producing a minimum number of words each day.

Recent democratic-socialist victories are raising a larger question about the future of the Democratic Party.

RNC Research compiled statements from prominent Democrats responding to the socialist/progressive wing’s growing influence. Raphael Warnock, Chris Murphy, Seth Moulton, and Johnny Olszewski have all defended Democrats as a “big tent” party. Bernie Sanders has celebrated progressive and democratic-socialist victories. AOC called socialism’s momentum a “very good sign for November.” Ro Khanna said the progressive movement is “on the ascendancy,” while Jim Clyburn acknowledged that socialism can play well politically.

The compilation also highlights Cory Booker, Jamie Raskin, Ami Bera, Cori Bush, Alex Bores, and Brad Lander discussing accommodation of or cooperation with the socialist wing.

Zohran Mamdani has gone even further, arguing that recent democratic-socialist victories represent a vision extending “beyond the midterms” and “beyond 2028.”

This matters because the DSA generally does not compete as a separate national third party. Its candidates commonly run through Democratic primaries and seek influence from within the Democratic electoral coalition.

That does not mean every Democrat is a socialist. There are still establishment and moderate Democrats resisting that direction. But DSA-backed candidates are winning races, socialist politicians are gaining influence, and more Democrats appear willing to treat them as part of the party’s governing coalition.

I strongly oppose that direction. The DSA agenda goes far beyond a few popular economic proposals and includes major changes to America’s economic and political institutions.

So is this merely one faction gaining influence—or are we watching the Democratic Party gradually embrace a socialist transformation from within?

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is doubling down on his identity as a democratic socialist while arguing that Wall Street, real-estate executives, and other business leaders have nothing to fear from his administration. He says he welcomes continued private investment in New York even while advocating higher taxes on the city’s wealthiest residents and corporations.

Mamdani also argues that democratic socialism represents a return to the Democratic Party’s New Deal tradition and says recent victories by democratic-socialist candidates show that voters are increasingly receptive to that political direction.

That raises a larger economic question.

Democratic socialists argue that government can substantially expand public programs, taxation, labor power, and social ownership while still maintaining productive relationships with private businesses and investors. Critics argue that increasingly burdensome taxation and an ideological movement committed to moving beyond capitalism will eventually discourage investment and undermine the private-sector economy.

Mamdani says businesses can continue investing and prospering under his approach. His critics are considerably less confident.

Do you believe a democratic-socialist government can substantially expand its agenda while maintaining a healthy, competitive private-sector economy?

I vote No.

Mamdani doubles down on democratic socialism while insisting Wall Street, business leaders can work with him
The new mayor argues Wall Street and corporate leaders have nothing to fear despite his push for higher taxes - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mamdani-doubles-down-democratic-socialism-insisting-wall-street-business-leaders-work-him

I feel we are reaching an apocalyptic moment in time. Everything feels so dystopian. I am newly married and broke. I would be homeless if I didn't live in my parents' house with my wife. Thank God my parents don't actually live here and live elsewhere. I have like $35 in my bank account to last me until I get my next Social Security disability check on the 3rd. I have held 25 jobs in a span of 15 years and now rely on disability. I am getting a small part time job to get some extra money because me and my wife are so tight financially.

I feel like the pretty people with no mental health issues and good genes are perhaps thriving better than me. Those who have Autism or mental health issues with poor social skills are likely to be the ones struggling more. I have noticed this.

Humans nature value rare things more than common things. Gold and platinum are obvious examples. Probably less than 1% of the world's population is a blonde hair, blue eyed females. Compare this with roughly the 95% of the world's population that has dark hair.

The classic narrative promoted by the State of Israel is that Palestinians are late-arriving colonizers to this land. Netanyahu frequently emphasizes this point.

In reality, Palestinians are genetically closer to the ancient Israelite samples that Israelis claim as their ancestors. This is because Jews did not reproduce in isolation to the extent many people assume; over the centuries, they mixed with Latins, Germanic peoples, and to some extent Slavs. As a result, only about half of their ancestry is Levantine. The evidence for this comes from genetics—the science that, in my view, carries more weight than the Torah.

The most ironic part is that, according to traditional Jewish belief, Samaritans are not considered "true Israelites" because they supposedly mixed with foreign peoples settled by the Assyrian Empire. Yet genetic evidence indicates that the Samaritans are among the best-preserved descendants of the ancient Israelites.

There's also a litmus test for figuring out who is indigenous. Here's how it works: spend a lot of time under the sun. If you end up with skin cancer, you'll know you came later. White Australians suffer from this far more than Aboriginal Australians. And then there are Israeli Jews—Palestinians do not develop skin cancer as frequently as they do.