<Skip if you're not interested in semantics.>
Stating your annoyance about how people use a word and arguing the semantics of the word only contributes towards clogging up the discussion with waffle and painfully detailed point-counterpoint text-walls that everyone loses interest in immediately. I'm going to do the sensible thing and take the meaning of socialism from what the majority of socialists in the world argue for; things like state control being used to counteract the inherent ruthlessness of the free market (i.e. minimum wage, working conditions, rent controls, holidays and working hours), free education, free healthcare (both paid for by contributions from those with means), social housing or money to assist those who cannot work or find themselves out of work... without spending too much time on the close up detail of it, that's roughly what i'll take it to mean and assume you know what i mean (because that's how the word IS used now, like it or not).
<Stop skipping now>

So without getting upset about etymology, I think a reasonable argument could be made for Jesus being a socialist:
- he believed in good will to your neighbour
- he spent time helping and caring for those who were shunned by society and encouraged others to do so too
- he considered greed to be a hindrance to spiritual enlightenment and/or a corrupting influence (easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle and all that)
- he healed and tended the sick for free
- he fed the multitude rather than send them to buy food for themselves
- he argued against worshiping false gods (money for example)

If we believe the stories.

I also think that a good argument could be made for Jesus not being a socialist. You haven't made one, but one could be made.

Marx is open to interpretation, so you're going to have to make your point about his quote clearer. I could take it to mean 4 or 5 different and opposing things.

More marketing babywipes to adults. This product is seriously evil as it clogs sewer systems, toilet paper works just fine.

All I could think of was what a stupidly large amount of butter they were spreading. I think my arteries clogged just looking at that.

I'm curious how, in an automated system like this, they deal with clogs or residue. I presume there's very little, or such a system wouldn't work, but I'm curious how a system relies on friction for heating while not causing buildup.

I absolutely love this man. His videos have become some of my most looked-forward-to sources of general information.

One would think, like a fine filter, dirt would build up fairly quickly and clog it.

I must say, the mixer dumping out the water looked like witchcraft...

with a stone that size you won't be thinking of passing - the urine would drain around it and if it obstructed then your kidneys would eventually fail.
You might be interested in stag horn calculi in humans - usually precipitated by proteus infection - these clog up the calyces in a branching fashion which would be impossible to pass.

The largest stone recorded in a human is believed to be this one at over 800grams.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/bladder-stone-kilo-amazing-pictures-2990838

"WE" is the nation as a whole. Because you wish to separate yourself from the rest of us does not mean 'there is no we', it only means you aren't one of us (or don't want to be).
I live in the real world, where most people are poor planners, and most people don't have the means to plan anyway (more every day, thanks to un-livable wages being the norm). It's not defeatist, it's realist. It would be wonderful if we all had the gift of forethought, perfect knowledge of financial planning, prognostication to be able to know what your needs WILL be, and the income to be able to follow through with financial plans. I live well on 1/2 of a <$30K income and take NO help from anywhere, but most people don't have my advantages or the willingness to live with less, or the time and space to do things like grow their own food, or the property and money/credit to get a solar/wind generation system, even though it saves them tons in the long term, they simply don't have the financial ability to plan long term.
I don't see what your next paragraph has to do with the topic. (It reminds me of the saying 'god only gives you the burden you can carry' which ignores the thousands that commit suicide because their burden was more than they could stand.) One can only rise to the opportunities one is presented with, those that have limited opportunities often have no way to 'rise to the occasion' or 'over come adversity', they can't even overcome their food bills, no matter how hard they work at Wendy's.

I'm for getting rid of 'government cheese' for anyone that does not need it, but removing all programs leaves us back in the 30's with roving gangs of the destitute clogging the streets, expensive abusive state run institutions for the elderly poor, and the economy tanking. I could support a 'means test' or the like for 'welfare' and social security, but it would benefit us all if everyone had access to healthcare, and in the long run would even save those who do pay for it, because as I've said repeatedly, we already pay their bills after the fact (by paying higher bills to cover for those that don't/won't/can't pay their bill). Giving us all access to healthcare outside the emergency room saves us ALL money...and removing the insurance industry middleman saves another 10%-25% that we get NO benefit from.

It's about addressing the real world, not insisting all people should act intelligently and fore-thoughtfully at all times, and designing a system that only works if they do and leads to disaster if they don't. I do not believe people, as a group, are good at planning for their future, and we all do better when at least the minimum of financial planning is taken care of by intelligent educated people rather than left to those who plan poorly. Sometimes that means paying to not have people camped on your lawn waiting to rob you...and it's cheaper to put them in an apartment than in jail. The systems could certainly be better (I'm not holding my breath that they will be improved though), but having no 'safety net' at all has already proven to be far worse for everyone, and the country as a whole in many ways.

Problem with those is they don't break down quick enough and end up clogging sewer systems if used daily. It's why your parents probably told you never to flush kitchen towel down the toilet either, same problem - just doesn't break down quick enough to prevent blockage.

Toilet paper is designed to avoid this problem (except that waxy shiny toilet paper found in public toilets that probably costs 2 quid for a hundred rolls since nobody wants to buy it).

This boring bit of trivia was brought to you by your local water reprocessing plant!

The NHS is a non-theistic universal health care system.

Still the pride of the nation despite corrupt politicians trying to sell it off, and creating confusing policy changes and overhauls to try and slow it down and clog it up to make it look like it needs privatisation.

Are you trying to play down the positive influence that atheistic people have had on the world? Because even the pope would call you an imbecile for trying to suggest that the world would be better off without contributions from those who worked under an atheistic remit (i.e. one which was prepared to challenge the traditional, often religious answers). And vice versa - the problem with the world is people who can't find the value in things they don't understand or agree with.

How very small minded of you to think that a life without theism is a life not worth living. I'm sure an alcoholic would say the same to a teetotaller. I couldn't find meaning in a life without god =/= there is no meaning in a life without god.

I tell you what; i'll have a life without meaning as long as you're a coward who is crippled delusional by their fear of the possibility they will one day cease to exist. Do you think your god approves of your behaviour?

If there is a god, he'll prefer my company over yours - i didn't need the promise of sweets later to be good now. I did it because i'm good.

In my opinion - and i think Brand's too, though i don't want to put words in his mouth - the motivation to act based upon nothing but profit is the largest and most significant drain on happiness and especially the advancement of us as a people. We need a revolution of principle, a revolution of the mind, we cannot keep on doing what we are doing when it is so clearly not working.

We have been pouring the results of our productivity into bank balances for so long now. If our productivity was represented by food instead of money, we would have been putting corn into a hole in the ground for 30 years and wondering why people are hungry. In a system based on corn, prosperity of a nation is based upon the free and active flow of corn.

I ask this question of you, because i don't know the answer. Do you think that we can continue pouring our productivity into big holes that other people sit on for "whenever they might need it?" Is it reasonable to build a system based on flow, but let huge clumps of it gather and expect everything to keep running quickly and without turbulence?

It just doesn't work anymore. The very rich don't realise it yet because they can afford to pay to avoid it, the quite rich notice it when they sit in traffic for example, but eventually things will become so clogged up that they will have no choice but to notice that there are no quality schools, hospitals, roads, airports, shops nor people to do their shopping, cleaning, cooking and driving. We all benefit, including the rich, if money is put into improving our infrastructure and facilities. We all benefit when productivity is flowing freely and quickly through the system. The opposite of that is called a depression, and it's when people don't have confidence in spending their money... we know that, we accept it, people were repeating it during the recession. How come we can't recognise the polar opposite? We're in a semi-permanent state of inverse depression, where those at the top don't have the means to spend their money, so it doesn't move.

This is an idea that needs to come from grassroots, everyone needs to come together somehow and unify over this idea. Because you can't blame any one individual for taking advantage of their fortunate position on the uneven playing field, or for fighting for a better position on the field. We all need to agree that the playing field has to be even, otherwise eventually the playing field will not be worth using.

I cannot stand this poisonous idea that you cannot ask a company for tax and here's my argument against that:
A lot of people live in the UK and a lot of people want to buy coffee and other assorted goods (starbucks, amazon). Even including tax, there is a lot of money to be made selling to these people. Let's say there is 2 billion pounds in profit available to be made by someone. That's still profit to be made by someone, and whoever offers that service to them under the correct rules makes that money.

The problem is that there's 4 billion to be made without tax, and it's cheaper to buy the politician for a billion to ensure you get the tax breaks. That is the poisoned system that psycho-capitalism has eventually produced... And it's so naive to think otherwise... so naive to think that those with billions of pounds wouldn't buy economists and lawyers, tout the favourable theories, generally spend top money on creating the right environment to make more money. Whether you think more or less tax is a good idea, surely have to agree that whatever the rules are, we adhere to them, or the system that we so carefully designed it around will fail.

Why are people so reticent to believe that we're being duped? No, surely not, it's the government, they can't possibly be lying to us. They stood in front of us, bare-faced, and told us they weren't torturing people, they had intelligence about WMDs, they weren't spying on us all. They prove themselves to be deceitful but like toddlers we trust the adult.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'American Standard, Toilet, Poo, Clog' to 'American Standard, Toilet, Poo, Clog, Wait For It' - edited by littledragon_79

OK, I see your points but....
1)with the plunger right there in it's holder, I never let it get close to spilling over, what a mess that would be (and there is a heat vent right there, UGH!)

2)I try to be careful plunging and not splash at all, but you do have a good point here, it would be cleaner, especially for those that get crazy plunging.

3)I leave the plunger in the toilet and flush again (at least once), to rinse it off some before removing it at all, then place it in it's holder. Granted, that's a bit nasty, but it never smells, and I give it a spray of bleach too. Every so often, while it's dry, I take it outside and wash it in the yard where the sun will sterilize everything.

The plastic seems to require you to clean before AND after, by hand at first BEFORE you can plunge (edit: with your face right next to the clog!)...and that's impossible if it's overflowing! Then what?!? A plunger can be cleaned up after at your leisure (better be before the wife needs the toilet though) and with scrubbing bubbles and/or bleach if that's your preference.

It may be strong enough to survive 'plunging' with your hands, but I certainly don't want to be the one to test that, or to find out it wasn't! It looks like if you don't get a perfect seal (so a perfect dry and clean rim first) it could easily detach. UGH!

Disposing the plastic requires you to take it to the garbage bag (or the bag to it) and then to take out that bag, which may or may not mean dripping it through your home, depending on your bathroom garbage. (mine has no bag)

All that said it's an interesting idea, but I think I prefer the plastic plunger. To each his own though.

Some times the vacuum hose can get clogged with pet fur and little plastic army men and make noise like that. She should be checked, maybe she aspirated one of her toys.

Fucking squirrels!

They built a nest in one half of my engine, including hundreds of pine cones from the air intake into the filter and all over the engine...which expanded to clog and crush everything. Also grass, leaves, plastics bags and Subway M&M cookies.

Luckily they didn't chew wires which I've heard can be $$$ to fix.

@VoodooV
when i use the term "extreme nasty" i am not referring to a civil war but rather the american public finally reaching its boiling point.

it started bubbling with the tea party,and if people recall it was NOT the rabid christian rightwing fascist group it is today.
they had real grievances and rightly so.

but they got co-opted by private monies.

then occupy blew up and they too had real grievances and since the power elites could not co-opt them like the tea party they were systematically shut down by targeted governmental edict.

thanks Obama.

for years the poor and working poor were disenfranchised,made irrelevant in a political system that only used them as talking points to garner sympathy during an election cycle.

but now the middle class are finding themselves falling into the ranks of poor and working poor and ALL have been made irrelevant and inconsequential.

the american public has been kept in a constant state of fear for over 25 years.
fear of brown people.
fear of losing their job.
losing their house.
hell they even fear their own neighbors!

while the beautiful and poetic nationalism of american exceptionalism and ingenuity sound great,most americans are aware its all bullshit.
the political system is corrupt and sick on its own hubris and greed.

the american public know that this government no longer serves their interest.just look at the data.time and time again the public has a strong opinion on a subject and yet our elected officials vote to serve their masters.
war in iraq? americans shouted NO!
bank bail out? resounding NO!
the examples over the past (especially the past 15 yrs) are staggering.

so while i admire your optimism in still using the political system to enact positive change.i just dont see it ever becoming a reality.
mainly because the system is rigged and not in our favor.

so that leaves only ONE option:take to the streets.
refuse to go to work.
keep your purchases to a minimum and trade with each other.
refuse to feed the beast.
clog it with bodies.
clog the streets..halt business from operating properly.

but avoid violence.

thats what the state uses and to give it reason to engage in violence will only serve to beget more violence.

make those in power afraid.
remind them who they really work for and that if they dont the whole fucking thing is gonna come crashing down.

its the only real option i see and if it comes to pass you will see those who wield power do so..and it will be very nasty.

see:the labor movement
see:civil rights
see:anti-war
see:woman sufferages