On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 18:52:13 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 3/15/2019 3:43 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 15:39:58 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/15/2019 3:12 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 15:05:39 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/15/2019 2:20 PM, Bruce wrote:

>>>>>> Why do you only offer two forms of socialism as choices? A democratic
>>>>>> socialist isn't the same thing as a social democrat, by the way. You
>>>>>> hear the word "social" and you get spams because you think it refers
>>>>>> to socialism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, why not explain the difference? Rather than educate do you just
>>>>> want to irritate?
>>>>
>>>> Because of your choice of two forms of socialism to make some kind of
>>>> clueless point. I think you were confusing a social democrat and a
>>>> democratic socialist.
>>>>
>>>> S O C I A L vs. S O C I A L I S T
>>>>
>>>> It's social to keep the door open for someone, but it doesn't make you
>>>> a socialist.
>>>>
>>> OK, so you don't know either.
>>>
>>> I do know I don't want the government ruling my life.
>>
>> Here we go again. You're still stuck on socialism. You really live in
>> the dark ages.
>>
>Yet you still give no idea of what is wrong and what is good about
>whatever social reforms you support. You sir. are just stirring shit
>and being an agitator but have nothing to stand on.
>
>Meantime, I'm enjoying life in the dark ages.

I want a transfer of power from the corporations/the big
companies/rich people to the average people, the masses.

That has nothing to do with socialism, but everything with 'social'.