For those who just don't get it.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Who do you suppose MLK wanted to GUARANTEE a basic income to the people?

He was a Socialist. He wanted the GOVERNMENT to guarantee a basic income to the people.

There was no other existing agency that could have done this.

[sirs]

Your own fricken article demonstrated precisely what he wanted......less defense spending, more infrastructure spending.  NOTHING there has anything to do with income redistribution, much less socialist doctrine.  YOU are the one trying to reinvent his intentions, despite the clear wording your own article provides.

sheeeeesh   

[Plane]

................................................ Rustin resigned from the march, stating that the goals of the campaign were too broad, that its demands were unrealizable, and that he thought that these campaigns would accelerate the backlash and repression on the poor and the black.[180]

    Rustin seems to have a valid point there.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Who, pray tell, could possibly GUARANTEE a BASIC INCOME to all Americans, if not the federal government?

[sirs]

I don't know how to break this to you, but his own postings, including what you, yourself have provided, demonstrate no desire or support of income redistribution.  Simply a call that the Government prioritize its spending, as in less defense, more towards infrastructure.  In particular, poverty heavy communities.  Now you can claim THAT as some form of redistribution, but hardly the type the current mutation of his message tries to push, in taxing "the rich" higher, and give that to "the poor"

[Xavier_Onassis]

GUARANTEE means the government assures a basic income for everyone. The Stock market guarantees nothing, ever. The capitalist system has zero guarantees. That is its nature. Capitalism cannot be made to guarantee anything anymore than a wolf can be made to live on zucchini and carrots.

GUARANTEE + BASIC INCOME = government programs, like Social Security. It could not mean anything other than that.

Government at the time of MLK was taxing the rich at a higher rate than it is now, a much higher rate. And pissing away much of it on a senseless, useless war in a place that was pof no importance to us then and still isn't.

[sirs]

You keep making my point...you keep reinventing what MLK's intentions had to be, based on 1 word.  And yet, no where can you find where he proclaimed Government must redistribute money from "the rich" and give to "the poor".  It was a desire to spend less on Defense and more on infrastructure....to give the poor more OPPORTUNITY, to better themselves

Did I mention no where?

[sirs]

Did I also fail to mention, that there are no "guarantees" in life??     

[Xavier_Onassis]

Okay, perhaps he wanted the government to just print money and give it to the poor.

The government had 10,000 or more troops in Vietnam at the time, and ending that stupid war could have freed up a lot of money. His degree was in theology, not economics. The Civil Rights Movemnet was replete with leftists. The rightwing wanted nothing to do with them. Goldwater was against any law which would have made it mandatory for businesses like lunch counters to serve Negros, as was Rand Paul.  There were very few private restaurants that did not have a sign that said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." And that did not mean people lacking neckties or people wearing flipflops. King did not refuse anyone of any political persuasion from joining the SCLC or the marches. The ratbag right called them all Communists and fellow travelers.

If you do not like the word GUARANTEE, take it up with MLK's ghost, He said what he said. Private enterprise and charities cannot guarantee anything.Only the government can do that. And the government's only source of income was taxes, since printing money involved the Federal Reserve, and they did not approve of allowing more money to be printed.

[sirs]

I tell you what Professor.....I'll focus on what MLK actually said, and you can focus on what he meant to say.  Fair enough?

[Plane]

GUARANTEE means the government assures a basic income for everyone. The Stock market guarantees nothing, ever. The capitalist system has zero guarantees. That is its nature. Capitalism cannot be made to guarantee anything anymore than a wolf can be made to live on zucchini and carrots.

Do you think the government can make a wolf live on zucchinis and carrots?

Neither can the government guarantee a minimum living wage to everyone.

For much the same reasons , King Chanute demonstrated to his court that the tide does not respond to the edicts of the government, neither do digestive systems , neither does math.


Good thing we don't have to perform this experiment here, Spain has just elected a government so leftist that they are proposing putting maximum limits on earning.

Greece is  busy electing a government that might repudiate a lot of debt and give everyone a bountiful living just for being Greeks.

When these things fail please do not fail to notice !

Previous failures of socialism seem to escape notice generally.

[sirs]

GUARANTEE means the government assures a basic income for everyone. The Stock market guarantees nothing, ever. The capitalist system has zero guarantees. That is its nature. Capitalism cannot be made to guarantee anything anymore than a wolf can be made to live on zucchini and carrots.

Do you think the government can make a wolf live on zucchinis and carrots?

Neither can the government guarantee a minimum living wage to everyone.

For much the same reasons , King Chanute demonstrated to his court that the tide does not respond to the edicts of the government, neither do digestive systems , neither does math.

Simple Plane English....and Math for that matter   :

[Xavier_Onassis]

The Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Austria all have far more equitable income distribution than the US. They have eleimnated poverty for everyone except a few recent immigrants and some crazy people that insist on not taking their meds. It has been done, and therefore you claiming it is impossible is a bunch of nonsense.

Sirs has no clue what MLK said or wrote. Other than the "I have a dream" speech, which everyone has heard a zillion times, sirs  has demonstrated that he knows diddly squat.

The problem in Greece is that income distribution is even worse than in the US and the rich do not pay their taxes.  Only government employees pay, because they have automatic deductions. Greece has two very disparate social classes, who even speak different languages. The problem in Greece is not one of Socialism, it is of dysfunctional government that has been made apparent because Greece has no control over its money. 

[sirs]

Sirs has no clue what MLK said or wrote. Other than the "I have a dream" speech, which everyone has heard a zillion times

Actually, having taken English at a young age, and able to read the language, I know perfectly well what he said & wrote.  What you fail to acknowledge, is that even his own words defy the notion he was some sort of socialist, advocating that Government redistribute wealth.  Your own example provided precisely what he said.  Your beef apparently is with MLK's own words.

But like I said, I'll focus on what he actually said and advocated, in particular a colorless society, where decisions and policy isn't based on skin color, and you can focus on what he really meant to say

[Xavier_Onassis]

Yeah, sure, continue to bask in your ignorant view that MLK hated the idea of a minimum wage,  favored the "flat tax"  and wanted to abolish the welfare system. Actually his real name was not Martin LUTHER King, it was Martin LIBERTARIAN King.


You do not know the truth, you will never know the truth, you will remain in ignorance until the last of your days.