You sure you are on the right forum? I'm thinking you need www.democratunderground.com
Whatever you want to beleive Laz. Helping people own private property isn't socialistic, well maybe it is in Laz world.
Ludicrious.
If I collectivize all the land in America, then redistribute it evenly to every man and woman, that is nearly a textbook definition of total socialist redistribution.
But because men and women are now private property owners, so Dane calls it capitalist.
Do you even think when you post, or do you just pound your keyboard with your fist, generating random characters?
And neither is making sure people have jobs, with minimum wages, and giving them and government cheese that they can keep and own. If you take away money from A and give it to B, it's not really socialism, it's for the "common good". A nice DU euphemism might be something like "rightsizing of wealth".
That's the real world, baby, and it's groovy, yeah.
Sorry to butt in...giving special interest groups taxpayer funded GRANTS for home ownership is very socialistic. This is a fine example of wealth re-distribution, gov overstepping its authority, and guaranteeing outcome rather than opportunity. I am just astounded at this one. How can this possibly be reconciled with the conservative value of self-sufficiency? Providing a safety net for those truly in need is one thing, paying for their friggin down payment is beyond the pale! And don't give me that home ownership or welfare hyperbole - it's not either or.
The socialistic part is the [Government] helping people own private property.