Capitalism vs Socialism ....a lesson for Teens and 20's - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

General Discussion Anything non-survival related - news and information, current events, general chit-chat stuff.

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-05-2019, 11:14 AM
Big_John's Avatar
Big_John Big_John is offline
That'll be the day...
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Somewhere in the West
Posts: 2,687
Thanks: 546
Thanked 10,776 Times in 2,224 Posts
Default Capitalism vs Socialism ....a lesson for Teens and 20's



Advertise Here

A response from Tom, a guy that just bought a new sports car.

Our youth, 20's and 30-year old's.... need this lesson.

=======================================

A guy looked at my Corvette the other day and said, "I wonder how many people could have been fed for the money that sports car cost."

I replied I am not sure;

it fed a lot of families in Bowling Green, Kentucky who built it,

it fed the people who make the tires,

it fed the people who made the components that went into it,

it fed the people in the copper mine who mined the copper for the wires,

it fed people in Decatur IL. at Caterpillar who make the trucks that haul the copper ore.

It fed the trucking people who hauled it from the plant to the dealer

and fed the people working at the dealership and their families.

BUT,... I have to admit, I guess I really donít know how many people it fed.

That is the difference between capitalism and welfare mentality.

When you buy something, you put money in peopleís pockets and give them dignity for their skills.

When you give someone something for nothing, you rob them of their dignity and self-worth.

Capitalism is freely giving your money in exchange for something of value.

Socialism is taking your money against your will and shoving something down your throat that you never asked for.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-05-2019, 06:16 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy ralfy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,584
Thanks: 94
Thanked 1,873 Times in 1,316 Posts
Default

Actually, it's giving your money in exchange for something of greater value, and for several decades part of it (sometimes much) is usually virtual value, such as a brand name, something endorsed by celebrities, or something that looks pretty.

Also, capitalism may involve "taking your money against your will and shoving something down your throat that you never asked for." Vince Packard calls it "the hidden persuaders," and it's also connected to virtual value. That is, people will tend to pay large amounts of money for something because of the brand name, celebrity endorsement, or because it looks pretty, such as sports cars, Hollywood tent-pole flicks, and jewelry. But the actual or practical value of the product is usually much lower than what was paid for it.

Other tactics are employed to maintain the buying binge, such as product obsolescence. That is, products are designed such that they should break down or become obsolete after a much shorter period of time. That way, business cycles are maintained.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ralfy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-05-2019, 07:12 PM
SCPigpen's Avatar
SCPigpen SCPigpen is offline
Shade Tree Gynecologist
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Down South
Posts: 3,678
Thanks: 893
Thanked 6,889 Times in 2,328 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Actually, it's giving your money in exchange for something of greater value, and for several decades part of it (sometimes much) is usually virtual value, such as a brand name, something endorsed by celebrities, or something that looks pretty.

Also, capitalism may involve "taking your money against your will and shoving something down your throat that you never asked for." Vince Packard calls it "the hidden persuaders," and it's also connected to virtual value. That is, people will tend to pay large amounts of money for something because of the brand name, celebrity endorsement, or because it looks pretty, such as sports cars, Hollywood tent-pole flicks, and jewelry. But the actual or practical value of the product is usually much lower than what was paid for it.

Other tactics are employed to maintain the buying binge, such as product obsolescence. That is, products are designed such that they should break down or become obsolete after a much shorter period of time. That way, business cycles are maintained.

But at least you have a choice where your money goes, practical or not. Not being dictated by some unelected or elected flunky.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to SCPigpen For This Useful Post:
Old 08-06-2019, 07:10 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy ralfy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,584
Thanks: 94
Thanked 1,873 Times in 1,316 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCPigpen View Post
But at least you have a choice where your money goes, practical or not. Not being dictated by some unelected or elected flunky.
That's what elected flunkies say in democracies.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-06-2019, 08:49 PM
TRyan's Avatar
TRyan TRyan is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: California
Posts: 8,486
Thanks: 6,405
Thanked 29,188 Times in 6,823 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Actually, it's giving your money in exchange for something of greater value, and for several decades part of it (sometimes much) is usually virtual value, such as a brand name, something endorsed by celebrities, or something that looks pretty.

Also, capitalism may involve "taking your money against your will and shoving something down your throat that you never asked for." Vince Packard calls it "the hidden persuaders," and it's also connected to virtual value. That is, people will tend to pay large amounts of money for something because of the brand name, celebrity endorsement, or because it looks pretty, such as sports cars, Hollywood tent-pole flicks, and jewelry. But the actual or practical value of the product is usually much lower than what was paid for it.

Other tactics are employed to maintain the buying binge, such as product obsolescence. That is, products are designed such that they should break down or become obsolete after a much shorter period of time. That way, business cycles are maintained.
That's called marketing and those people at the marketing firm have families to feed too. So do the maintenance people that take care of the building where the marketers work. And the restaurant owners who feed the marketing people at lunch. Not to mention the city workers who (are supposed to) keep up the roads the marketing people take to work. Should I go on?
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TRyan For This Useful Post:
Old 08-07-2019, 06:45 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy ralfy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,584
Thanks: 94
Thanked 1,873 Times in 1,316 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRyan View Post
That's called marketing and those people at the marketing firm have families to feed too. So do the maintenance people that take care of the building where the marketers work. And the restaurant owners who feed the marketing people at lunch. Not to mention the city workers who (are supposed to) keep up the roads the marketing people take to work. Should I go on?
Yes, but that doesn't counter my point. If any, it introduces one reason why capitalism requires continuous growth. The other is maximization of profit for investors, especially given competition.

In short, everyone wants to earn more not just to pay for basic needs (which are also becoming more expensive) but to gain middle class conveniences. That's why in the same businesses they want to earn more or receive better returns on their investment.

In order to pay for increasing wages, businesses have to sell more goods and services, which means their employees have to be more productive, and at a level higher than their wage increases. That's because the increasing profit benefits investors. This is done through combinations of automation and finding out ways to make people work harder.

Meanwhile, the same wage earners are expected to buy from the same businesses. That's because businesses can only profit if what is produced is sold. And since more is being produced, then more has to be sold.

Hence, the need for marketing, "new and improved" products, planned obsolescence, etc.

But goods and services draw from material resources and energy, and ultimately, these lead to diminishing returns and pollution. Meanwhile, even as lower birth rates are driven by increasing prosperity (as basic needs are met and more avail of middle class conveniences), businesses expect people to increase their productivity and their consumption rate, with profits generated from these businesses concentrated among a few who want to re-invest the same profits for even more production and consumption.

How long will this arrangement last? The mainstream teaches teens and those in their twenties that it will last forever, and that even socialists will give in and become part of the consumer spending society. But a small group argues that it will not last, and only because of physics. That is, there is no way that a limited biosphere can continue providing resources and energy to a demanding population indefinitely. That's small group has been generally prepping and expecting systemic catastrophe involving combinations of catastrophes amplifying each other.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ralfy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-07-2019, 07:20 PM
RKW's Avatar
RKW RKW is offline
Generator Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: A1 on the jukebox
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 12,177
Thanked 6,415 Times in 2,191 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Yes, but that doesn't counter my point. If any, it introduces one reason why capitalism requires continuous growth. The other is maximization of profit for investors, especially given competition.

In short, everyone wants to earn more not just to pay for basic needs (which are also becoming more expensive) but to gain middle class conveniences. That's why in the same businesses they want to earn more or receive better returns on their investment.

In order to pay for increasing wages, businesses have to sell more goods and services, which means their employees have to be more productive, and at a level higher than their wage increases. That's because the increasing profit benefits investors. This is done through combinations of automation and finding out ways to make people work harder.

Meanwhile, the same wage earners are expected to buy from the same businesses. That's because businesses can only profit if what is produced is sold. And since more is being produced, then more has to be sold.

Hence, the need for marketing, "new and improved" products, planned obsolescence, etc.

But goods and services draw from material resources and energy, and ultimately, these lead to diminishing returns and pollution. Meanwhile, even as lower birth rates are driven by increasing prosperity (as basic needs are met and more avail of middle class conveniences), businesses expect people to increase their productivity and their consumption rate, with profits generated from these businesses concentrated among a few who want to re-invest the same profits for even more production and consumption.

How long will this arrangement last? The mainstream teaches teens and those in their twenties that it will last forever, and that even socialists will give in and become part of the consumer spending society. But a small group argues that it will not last, and only because of physics. That is, there is no way that a limited biosphere can continue providing resources and energy to a demanding population indefinitely. That's small group has been generally prepping and expecting systemic catastrophe involving combinations of catastrophes amplifying each other.
You remind me of a Christmas turkey.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to RKW For This Useful Post:
Old 08-08-2019, 06:27 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy ralfy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,584
Thanks: 94
Thanked 1,873 Times in 1,316 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKW View Post
You remind me of a Christmas turkey.
When you're ignorant, anything will remind you of a Christmas turkey.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ralfy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-12-2019, 11:06 AM
txprep txprep is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,525
Thanks: 3,274
Thanked 13,118 Times in 4,594 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Yes, but that doesn't counter my point. If any, it introduces one reason why capitalism requires continuous growth. The other is maximization of profit for investors, especially given competition.

In short, everyone wants to earn more not just to pay for basic needs (which are also becoming more expensive) but to gain middle class conveniences. That's why in the same businesses they want to earn more or receive better returns on their investment.

In order to pay for increasing wages, businesses have to sell more goods and services, which means their employees have to be more productive, and at a level higher than their wage increases. That's because the increasing profit benefits investors. This is done through combinations of automation and finding out ways to make people work harder.

Meanwhile, the same wage earners are expected to buy from the same businesses. That's because businesses can only profit if what is produced is sold. And since more is being produced, then more has to be sold.

Hence, the need for marketing, "new and improved" products, planned obsolescence, etc.

But goods and services draw from material resources and energy, and ultimately, these lead to diminishing returns and pollution. Meanwhile, even as lower birth rates are driven by increasing prosperity (as basic needs are met and more avail of middle class conveniences), businesses expect people to increase their productivity and their consumption rate, with profits generated from these businesses concentrated among a few who want to re-invest the same profits for even more production and consumption.

How long will this arrangement last? The mainstream teaches teens and those in their twenties that it will last forever, and that even socialists will give in and become part of the consumer spending society. But a small group argues that it will not last, and only because of physics. That is, there is no way that a limited biosphere can continue providing resources and energy to a demanding population indefinitely. That's small group has been generally prepping and expecting systemic catastrophe involving combinations of catastrophes amplifying each other.
capitalism doesnt require continuous growth.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-12-2019, 07:27 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy ralfy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,584
Thanks: 94
Thanked 1,873 Times in 1,316 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txprep View Post
capitalism doesnt require continuous growth.
Actually, it does. That's why it's called "capitalism." The profits earned from sales are reinvested to expand production: that's your "capital."
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-06-2019, 09:28 PM
alv7722's Avatar
alv7722 alv7722 is offline
Come and Take Them!
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Where I Am Now
Posts: 2,923
Thanks: 15,878
Thanked 7,655 Times in 2,215 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Actually, it's giving your money in exchange for something of greater value, and for several decades part of it (sometimes much) is usually virtual value, such as a brand name, something endorsed by celebrities, or something that looks pretty.

Also, capitalism may involve "taking your money against your will and shoving something down your throat that you never asked for." Vince Packard calls it "the hidden persuaders," and it's also connected to virtual value. That is, people will tend to pay large amounts of money for something because of the brand name, celebrity endorsement, or because it looks pretty, such as sports cars, Hollywood tent-pole flicks, and jewelry. But the actual or practical value of the product is usually much lower than what was paid for it.

Other tactics are employed to maintain the buying binge, such as product obsolescence. That is, products are designed such that they should break down or become obsolete after a much shorter period of time. That way, business cycles are maintained.
The difference is no one is forced to buy any of these products at the point of a gun!! Socialism/Communism has never brought anything but poverty, misery, and Death!!
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to alv7722 For This Useful Post:
Old 08-07-2019, 06:47 PM
ralfy's Avatar
ralfy ralfy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,584
Thanks: 94
Thanked 1,873 Times in 1,316 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alv7722 View Post
The difference is no one is forced to buy any of these products at the point of a gun!! Socialism/Communism has never brought anything but poverty, misery, and Death!!
Even better. Reminds me of that anecdote about Nazis figuring out how to encourage people to think that they were not losing the war. Instead of showing them film clips of soldiers marching proudly, show them dancing girls instead.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-13-2019, 12:16 AM
ForgedInTheFlame ForgedInTheFlame is offline
I love this forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 6,384
Thanks: 22,873
Thanked 10,084 Times in 4,308 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alv7722 View Post
The difference is no one is forced to buy any of these products at the point of a gun!! Socialism/Communism has never brought anything but poverty, misery, and Death!!
Nailed it.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-13-2019, 04:55 AM
me me is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,787
Thanks: 1,231
Thanked 3,321 Times in 1,491 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sonya1 View Post
If the population did not grow ( or better yet shrank) , we would not need to run out of resources. Non renewable ones maybe but not stuff like food, because you can grow more. If you have more people than you can feed, you will have problems obviously.

Yes, U.S. already has socialism, ( I don't think any country has 100 % free market economy without taxes and rules, or is there?) but that's the point. The point is the U.S. economy depends on population growth. If the population stays the same or shrinks the whole economic system fails, because GDP needs to go up. Make sense? The same amount of people are not going to buy more and more stuff they don't need in half the cases , so you need more people. Example housing: if you have no new people, you build very few new houses. We live in a house that is about 70 years old. We will fix what falls apart. Many people do that. Same with cars. You can drive a used car for all your life . It's like that with almost anything.
There might be some new technology everyone wants to be like Iphones that nobody had 20 years ago, but there isn't enough of that to grow the economy. If the economy doesn't grow, the stock market goes down.
So they need more people. The result is the illegals are being let in, and refugees and anyone else that can come here and buy stuff.

As far as everyone getting educated and getting well paying jobs, I don't think that's possible. First, not everyone is intelligent enough . Second there are just not enough high paying jobs around. You say "get educated" but do you realize how ignorant a lot of the population is? Most are too stupid to pass high school algebra without trouble. How are these people going to become doctors, lawyers, engineers, pharmacists, or successful business people? Not
Population growth does not, and in the long run, is not gong to stop. It doesn't matter what economic theory is used it will always grow long term.

You are complaining that a person with an average IQ can't become a doctor or lawyer or scientist as an argument against my position a person needs to gain skills and abilities to make a good living. I'm not saying they will be a doctor, lawyer, or scientist, so your point is mute. There are plenty of jobs that simply require a bit of skill and some abilities and they pay well. Doctors, lawyers, and scientists are generally paid very well. The trades just about all pay well, and don't require a 4/6/8 year college commitment. There have been many recent news articles detailing that there are many jobs not being filled in our economy, simply because there aren't any qualified applicants to fill them. These jobs require specific skill sets and a bit of knowledge or ability that almost anybody can obtain without going through a lengthy bit of education.

If all you are looking for is reasons why something can't be done, then you will find innumerable reasons it can't be done. If you are looking for reasons why something can be done you will probably find one and it will be done.

A buddy of mine was a lifelong law enforcement officer. He hurt his back and was no longer able to be a police officer. He was unemployed for over a year. A neighbor of his knew of a job coming open at his work and told my friend about it. The only thing he had to do was learn how to use various computer programs. He had no knowledge or background in those programs, so he went to work teaching himself about them. He went to the bookstore (I don't remember which one) and bought a bunch of ...For Dummies books and taught himself how to use the programs over the course of a a few weeks. When the job announcement came out he knew everyone of the programs well enough to start working. It turned out he knew enough about the programs, several co-workers would ask him how to make the programs do certain things.

I pay a guy $40 each time he mows my yard. He spends less than 30 minutes doing it. Multiply that over 15-20 yards and he's looking at $400-800 per week for 5-10 hours work. bump that up to a 40 hour week and you are looking at $3200 per week. I have a small yard. My grandfather -in-law had a smaller yard that took 15 minutes from offload to heading down the road. He paid $30 each time. The skill required is the ability to sweat and that of a 12 year old child. A buddy of mine cut grass as a side hustle. He was a bit more expensive than my guy and wouldn't get out of his truck for less than $45. He said it took about two years to reimburse him for the cost of his equipment. After that, his only expense was gas, insurance and maintenance, which was not very expensive. He lamented several times that he missed not having several thousand in cash laying around the house.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-13-2019, 09:24 AM
sonya1's Avatar
sonya1 sonya1 is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,066
Thanks: 5,602
Thanked 13,374 Times in 4,616 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by me View Post
Population growth does not, and in the long run, is not gong to stop. It doesn't matter what economic theory is used it will always grow long term.
You are very misinformed. At this point in history ONLY populations in ****holes are still growing. ALL western and modern countries no longer have population growth. In some cases like Japan the population is shrinking at a rapid rate. The only reason the U.S. still has some population growth is because they import all these people from ****hole countries. It takes MORE than 2 kids a family for the population to grow. Very few families today have more than 2 kids ( I don't, I have 2), and many have none.

As for making lots of money doing lawn care. Most people do their own lawns ( ours is eaten by the goats :-) , not sure everyone can find enough lawns to mow. A few people I knew in Florida paid teenagers a few $ to mow their lawns, not $40. I think you are the exception

I don't disagree with you that there are a lot of lazy ass people that could be doing something to make money, but I doubt ALL could find well paying jobs.

One example I have is people working in a slaughter house cutting up meat. We could REALLY use on in our area, and the local ag extension has tried to bring someone here, but there are just too few people that want to do that job. The 2 in the area make a ton of money ( because you have to be a USDA facility to be able to sell any meat legally in the U.S., so you can't do it on your own farm). We have to drive to West Virginia to get ours done. But the people we go to are Americans, and don't have any illegals employed. That alone makes the trip worth it to me!
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-13-2019, 08:59 PM
Harmless Drudge's Avatar
Harmless Drudge Harmless Drudge is offline
Weed 'em and reap
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: A once-free nation
Age: 42
Posts: 29,861
Thanks: 244,443
Thanked 124,674 Times in 24,651 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post
Actually, it's giving your money in exchange for something of greater value, and for several decades part of it (sometimes much) is usually virtual value, such as a brand name, something endorsed by celebrities, or something that looks pretty.

Also, capitalism may involve "taking your money against your will and shoving something down your throat that you never asked for." Vince Packard calls it "the hidden persuaders," and it's also connected to virtual value. That is, people will tend to pay large amounts of money for something because of the brand name, celebrity endorsement, or because it looks pretty, such as sports cars, Hollywood tent-pole flicks, and jewelry. But the actual or practical value of the product is usually much lower than what was paid for it.

Other tactics are employed to maintain the buying binge, such as product obsolescence. That is, products are designed such that they should break down or become obsolete after a much shorter period of time. That way, business cycles are maintained.
Codswhallop. Poppycock. Flapdoodle, even.

Would you trade something you have for something you do not if the something you do not was not worth more to you than the something you have? No, you would not. That is the basis of free market economics. You value what I have more than you value what you have, butbthe converse is also true. I value what you have more than I value what I have. Elsewise, one of us will not voluntarily transact business.

That is to say, yes, the $10 is worth more to me than the widget I sold you, but the widget is worth more to you than the $10 you paid me. I got $10 for a widget that cost me $7 to make, while you got a widget that is worth more than the wallet sized portrait of Alexander Hamilton that you gave me.

As for virtual value, where is the compulsion? Neither Nike nor Michael Jordan FORCED you to buy $300 athletic shoes. YOU decided that owning them, and the prestige/fashion wherewithal they imparted, was worth more to YOU than those $300.

But let's take this example up to 30,000 feet and look down at the big picture, shall we? In capitalist economies, excess wealth allows people to overpay for designer sneakers, whereas in socialist countries, the people can't often afford even crappy and mundane shoes. Heck, in China today, there are still people cobbling together makeshift sandals from old tires.

So you can stick your virtual value where the sun don't shine.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-05-2019, 06:21 PM
randyt's Avatar
randyt randyt is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: tipp of the mitt
Posts: 2,317
Thanks: 4,269
Thanked 4,280 Times in 1,436 Posts
Default

awesome Big John, the same could be said for something as simple as toilet paper. Not a big cost item but the number of people involved from start to finish is just as important.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to randyt For This Useful Post:
Old 08-05-2019, 06:33 PM
Cavalcade of Events Cavalcade of Events is offline
I love this forum
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,193
Thanks: 287
Thanked 2,295 Times in 1,089 Posts
Default

In the end, Tom really doesn't know.

Good lesson.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-05-2019, 07:16 PM
jetgraphics's Avatar
jetgraphics jetgraphics is online now
Gumpherhooberpelt
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: near Atlanta, GA
Age: 65
Posts: 4,309
Thanks: 351
Thanked 8,727 Times in 2,933 Posts
Default

Methinks the lesson mixed metaphors.

Capitalism only means the private ownership of the means of production - like land, tools, resources. Absolute ownership is one of the endowed rights.

Socialism abolishes private ownership, and substitutes government (collective) ownership. This can be accomplished overtly, via nationalization, or covertly, via extensive licensing, regulations and taxes, that make the government dominant in all things, and from whom you need permission (license). If you need permission, you have no rights.


{FWIW - the USA has been socialist since 1933, when "St" Roosevelt liberated all the gold money and began TAKING from one to GIVE to another, without paying just compensation, as required for private property. Of course, it's unconstitutional if it wasn't voluntary - you do know you consented, right?}
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jetgraphics For This Useful Post:
Old 08-06-2019, 07:18 PM
Don H Don H is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,006
Thanks: 4,477
Thanked 6,967 Times in 2,024 Posts
Default

Capitalism vs Socialism, a lesson for college kids.

Capitalism; When you work your butt off all semester studying, do all the homework and projects and get a grade that reflects your hard work.

Socialism; A group project. Some, or most of the others do little, if any work on the project leaving most of the work to a few. Everyone gets the same grade.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Don H For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net