HOME | DD
Party9999999 — The Class War
Published: 2012-11-30 16:42:13 +0000 UTC; Views: 3274; Favourites: 53; Downloads: 43
Redirect to original
Description
Yah!Related content
Comments: 104
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It's not that capitalism is bad, it just needs some reforms. Trickle down economics doesn't work when you're outsourcing jobs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SOMETHING'S trickling down onto the lower classes... But it's not funding!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Tax the rich, the "trickle Down Methode" Dosen't work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
sorry dude but that's the way it is in the world capitalism works by turning greed into jobs, socialism and communism don't work unless you take what people earned away from them. I'd love to live the communistic way but not every one in the world is willing to do their equal share so my work benefits lazy people who are smart enough to cheat the system. And while it is true that capitalism does the same thing sort of, at least it allows a good man to be rich were as in communism only the bad people can be.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
In communism, all are economically equal. In capitalism, one is encouraged to strive on the backs and labors of others.
So now please explain to me how communism allows the cruel to flourish, and capitalism doesn't.
Bonus points if you can justify donald trump's wealth.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I don't think you really read what I said, communism is a cool idea but it simply doesn't work, look a Castro, that guy is way more privileged than the rest of his country and he's one of the most corrupt people on the planet. In addition to that I never said capitalism doesn't let the cruel flourish, it just happens to turn that cruel man's success into jobs for those who aren't doing as well.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Communism is the abolition of class and the institution of indiscriminate equality.
Every example of "communism" you can provide, in order to detail its faults, involves one powerful and wealthy class ruling over the masses of peasants. So you condemn communism, but what you define is authoritarian aristocracy.
Point being, you can't say communism doesn't work when it's never been employed. Perhaps it won't work purely because people are too corruptible to allow for it. I don't agree with communism that much either, absolute equality provides little incentive to do anything. But if you're going to argue against communism, argue against actual communism.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
If this true communism you speak of has never been employed how do you know it's possible at all?
I mean humans have been experimenting with government for several million years and your telling me no one ever thought to implement true communism?
It seems more likely to me that it has been implemented, but it was so infeasible that the Cuban and Soviet "authoritarian aritocracies" had to take over to maintain some semblane of order.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't know that it's possible. I said myself that perhaps the fact that its turned to aristocracy every time its been employed, perhaps people are simply too corruptible for it. But humans are always becoming more compassionate and educated. So perhaps some day in the future communism may work. Hell, maybe some day even anarchy could work. But for now both seem to result in mass confusion and chaos.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
A simple point. When people are wealthier and better off, it's a lot easier to be compassionate and get an education. The one economic system that has allowed more people to become more wealthy than any other system in society is Capitalism. The countries that often give the most charity to the rest of the world are those that have accumulated large amounts of wealth through Capitalism. The United States which I find is often accused of being greedy is THE MOST charitable country in the world.
Ironically, Studies have shown that those who favor Free Markets tend to be more Conservative are much more charitable than those who believe in controlled/regulated economies and tend to be more liberal.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
GodCock I'll just post what I have to say here since you locked be from replying and hope you read this.
It's fine to be disinterested in a debate, I completely respect that decision. I've sometimes been in arguments I've gotten tired of and just abandoned, but if you don't want a response, don't go telling people everything they say is wrong and make disputable statements. In the future I recommend not responding at all, or just simply state a disinterest in the conversation. Bear in mind if you're going to make statements be prepared to deal with people who think otherwise. Simply saying others are idiots, that someone is wrong, and making the factually wrong statement that someones argument solely comes from Fox News without any evidence at all to support those points in my opinion is closed minded, biased, and idiotic.
The only reason Capitalism is the only game in town is it's the superior economic system that brings about the greatest amount of Peace and Prosperity. During the Cold War the average living standards of largely Capitalist countries was much higher than that in Communist countries. You didn't see the West putting up walls and border police to keep people from getting out.
I'm going to need your definition of EXPLOITATION. How I see it exploitation is perfectly fine and natural. People exploit land to grow crops and feed themselves and others, People exploit minerals to make products, people exploit labor to get goods and services, and labor exploits employers to get money. People exploit opportunities that's what we do to advance ourselves. It's all fine so long as force isn't involved and peoples basic human rights of Life, Liberty, and Property are respected.
[link]
Depending on what you mean by Manipulation there could be an array of responses to that.
Conquering other countries is often a costly and expensive endeavors and maintaining control over those countries is a costly and expensive endeavor. The European nations paid far more for their Colonial possessions than they obtained in return. Let's remember Colonialism is not a Capitalist function it's Government function.
[link]
Capitalism is the Private ownership of property and the means of production and free voluntary transactions made among individuals, or free associations. Production adheres to consumer demand which appropriate resources to creating the wanted goods and competition forces producers to find better and more efficient ways of producing those goods and improving quality. In order to provide the most goods and services companies hire people who work together to create those goods and services. Companies work with other companies around the world to create those goods and services. Free trade fosters more peace, cooperation, and prosperity around the world.
[link]
[link]
If you think everything is wrong please bring me the facts that suggest otherwise.
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Capitalism retains its status only by being the only game in town, generally by way of exploitation, manipulation, and conquest. Of course the biggest and meanest monkey can easily steal all the bananas from those who've labored to collect them, and therefore is currently considered the most powerful and successful. The point is for the weaker monkeys to band together, kill the big monkey, and take his bananas for themselves.
Hopefully that's simple enough for you to understand.
Sorry, but before this goes further I really just don't have any interest in debating you. Nearly every last thing you've said is factually wrong, and could only have come from fox news. And to that you'll simply claim closed-minded bias on my behalf, that my disinterest in debate is merely disguised inability, blahblahblah. Frankly you're all idiots and I'm just sick of it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Maybe one day. I'm not gonna hold my breath though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If you ask me, we'll likely be extinct before any such possibility.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
once again, not really reading what I'm posting, I like communism, I'm saying it just doesn't work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't think you even know what you're posting.
Your original comment claimed that capitalism turned greed into jobs. It doesn't. It turns necessity into jobs. Capitalism as a political philosophy justifies greed, and makes it a virtue. You also said that in communism, only 'bad people' can be rich. Displaying your ignorance, in that if anyone is rich in communism, it's no longer communism.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Displaying your ignorance, in that if anyone is rich in communism, it's no longer communism." That actually made me laugh a little. Because I keep saying communism doesn't work and how much I would love to live under one, if it worked. Your right when the bad man takes over its not communism anymore but the entire basis of my argument is that I don't like it because it always, ALWAYS turns into a fake communism. As for the first part referring to my original comment, I don't see how what your saying and what I'm saying about capitalism aren't happening at the same time. My greed makes me into a business man, the necessity of my workers makes them take the jobs. It creates a competitive market in which my ambition make me and my company at the top. The Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines ambition as "desire to achieve a particular end" and Karl Marx said "It is not history which uses men as a means of achieving - as if it were an individual person - its own ends. History is nothing but the activity of men in pursuit of their ends." Weather it be for greed or necessity we're still in pursuit of needs. Now that I look back turning greed into jobs may not be that accurate. So I suppose I must now say Capitalism turns the pursuit of ends into jobs. At this point I don't think we'll see a winner of this debate, you seem vary convinced your right I'm just as convinced so shall we agree to disagree?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then we share our criticism of communism. Forgive my clarification, it is only because you've been terribly inconsistent with your descriptions.
You argue for the basic concepts of capitalism, which are valid to a degree, but you ignore the massive and inevitable faults of modern capitalism. Such as wealth transference from parent to child more often than not ensuring that the children of poor parents will remain poor, and the children of rich parents will remain rich. A fiscal nepotism which is unavoidable by capitalism. The pursuit of profit and the drive to spare expenses leads us to abundant resources of high cost and low quality, and also more work and less pay for the workers involved. Not to mention the superior influence of money has simplified philosophy, jeopardized science, and destroyed art. In that our public thinkers are twits like Bill Oreilly and Chris Matthews, our science commitee houses creationists and climate-change-deniers, and our artists are uninspired puppets like maroon 5 and nicki minaj. Our society doesn't reward ambition and individuality, it rewards stupidity, exploitation, deception, stubborn denialism, ego, and conformity, leaving us with this absurd and humiliating idiocracy.
I don't claim to know the ultimate solution to human order, but I do have the sense to see that capitalism is among the theories proven not to work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I don't claim to know the ultimate solution to human order, but I do have the sense to see that capitalism is among the theories proven not to work.
You don't sense at all, or you would see that Capitalism works better than all the rest. No other economic system has produced more wealth and improved the average persons quality of life than that of Capitalism. It's far from perfect do to the simple fact humans are involved, but it does work. Important lesson here, POVERTY is NATURAL and PROSPERITY is UNNATURAL. No one has to work for people to be poor, people have to work to produce wealth. This concept is very difficult for those who are used to living in a prosperous society where the question is "Why are there poor people?" But when you take a casual glance at history and the world today the vast majority of people today and throughout history have lived in what we would call poverty. Begging the more appropriate question "How do you have prospering societies?" I have found that the countries that embrace mostly free markets and capitalism prosper.
Such as wealth transference from parent to child more often than not ensuring that the children of poor parents will remain poor, and the children of rich parents will remain rich. A fiscal nepotism which is unavoidable by capitalism.
Free Marketeers such as my self have a tendency to stress the Individual and Individual society. But probably the one thing that has proven to out way someones individual interest is that of the family interest. It's amazing how much people sacrifice and give to their family especially their Children. People should be free to determine how their wealth is distributed and utilized after they die. If an institution like the government takes all of someone wealth after they die, what could end up happening is someone might waste it all frivolous entertainment and try to use it all while they're alive. Instead of investing, saving it, preparing for it to better further generations.
A poor person doesn't offer much in terms of inheritance. But you know, poor people don't stay. There are tons of people who have gone from being outright poor to being very wealthy. John Rockefeller(Started Standard Oil), Andrew Carnegie(Started Carnegie Steel), Thomas Edison (Created General Electric), Henry Ford (Created Ford Motor Company), Milton Hershey (Created Hershey Company), Sam Walton (Started Walmart), Ursula Burns(Runs Xerox), Howard Schultz(Made Starbucks what it is today), Li Ka Shing, (Left war torn mainland China to Hong Kong and became the richest man in East Asia), Ingvar Kampard(Created Ikea), JK Rowling (Creator of the Harry Potter Franchise), Oprah Winfrey( Created a huge Media Empire). I can name many more, but I think you get the points. I would also like to add that in the US over 90% of those in the bottom 10% 30-40 years ago are no longer their today. This is largely due to the fact that many people we consider are young people, just getting a start in society and have very little skills, experience, and a reputation. We also have immigrants who have no reputation and are coming from very poor countries. As these people work they gain more skills, experience, and build a reputation that increase their value as a worker and ultimately their wage. Another thing to note is yearly income for many people doesn't stay the same from year to year. Someone in San Francisco can sell their house and become a millionaire that year, but won't be the next cause they don't have another house in San Fran. People who sell stocks can have inconstant incomes, or someones company might have a bad year. One last thing is people don't sit asses and stay poor, most continue to try and find work and better themselves. One thing that can happen is governments can create incentives to stay poor and put disincentives to seeking higher incomes. In one extreme case in a county in Pennsylvania is it is more advantageous to have a 29,000 dollar a year than have a 55,000 dollar a year income.
The pursuit of profit and the drive to spare expenses leads us to abundant resources of high cost and low quality, and also more work and less pay for the workers involved.
First off I see nothing wrong with abundant resources, and most companies seek to reduce expenses to increase profit margin. This statement is extremely ridiculous. Pull the phone out of your pocket and tell me it isn't better than the last one you had? The Pursuit of profit is largely kept in checked by someone else's pursuit of profit. If company A increases prices and reduces quality, what is stopping company B from lowering prices and making a better product. People would buy from B and A can't sell their goods and ultimately loose money. Most people didn't have internet 20 years ago, most people didn't have cellphones let alone cellphones that have HD camera's, HD Video Players, Played Games, hooked up to the Internet, had GPS all built into one device, Cars are much safer and more comfortable than 20 years ago, clothing is stronger and doesn't bleed anymore(at least with my experience), Computers become more and more powerful every year, I bought an 8GB SD card for $80 four years ago, I bought an 8GB SD card a few months ago for $12.
Companies have to compete for workers, especially the good ones. If a company abuses and underpays their workers they'll seek employment elsewhere that offers better wages and working conditions because those companies want the good workers. This is happening in China right now. Many factories have been forced to increase wages and improve conditions cause many good and experienced workers are leaving to seek newly available employment opportunities.
Not to mention the superior influence of money has simplified philosophy, jeopardized science, and destroyed art.
How has money simplified Philosophy and how has philosophy simplified and why is this a bad thing(Not to say it's good)? How has science been jeopardized the wealth produced from Capitalism funds much scientific research and companies pay people money to research things that improve peoples lives. There was an organization, I think it was called the X Project, that offered large cash prizes to produce, and improve certain things. The cash incentive led to the space plane that Richard Branson later bought(He had modest beginnings too) and led to team that found a way to clean up oil spills 20 times faster. People with lots of wealth can spend all their time being Philosophical thinkers. Karl Marx was able to spend all his time to philosophize about things cause he lived off his friend Friedrick Engels who "INHERITED" all his money from his Industrialist Father. It's quite funny how wealthy many of the early Communist Philosophs lived.
In that our public thinkers are twits like Bill Oreilly and Chris Matthews, our science commitee houses creationists and climate-change-deniers, and our artists are uninspired puppets like maroon 5 and nicki minaj.
But there are a lot of other smart thinkers like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter E Williams, many others I can't think of right now. I have not idea what a Science Commitee House is, people should be free to believe what they want and you're free to believe what you want and argue it. The idea that artists are uninspired puppet maroons is your individual opinion and I believe many will beg to differ.
Our society doesn't reward ambition and individuality, it rewards stupidity, exploitation, deception, stubborn denialism, ego, and conformity, leaving us with this absurd and humiliating idiocracy.
Actually I see our society rewards ambition the most wealthy people to ever live were ambitious, you don't think Steve Jobs was Ambitious with coming up with the Personal Computer? Individuality is a bit trickier, I guess it depends on how one is being an individual. I don't see how society rewards stupidity, if anything it increasingly rewards smarts. I'm going to need your definition of EXPLOITATION. How I see it exploitation is perfectly fine and natural. People exploit land to grow crops and feed themselves and others, People exploit minerals to make products, people exploit labor to get goods and services, and labor exploits employers to get money. People exploit opportunities. It's all fine so long as force isn't involved. Deceptions rewards are often short lived, cause you obtain a reputation of being a deceiver people won't trust you and offer you opportunities even if you are honest in intent this time. Some people are just stubborn and how does society reward that?, nor do I see how our society rewards ego, or conformity although conformity to a degree isn't always a bad. If everyone is doing it their might be a benefit to doing it. How is this an absurd Humiliating Idiocracy?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I disagree with the first part, from my perception you've been inconsistent. So I suppose what we have here is a misunderstanding of each other's arguments. As for the Middle part I can't deny that's what's been happening but I don't think those faults are a result of capitalism but rather the result our society in general. I feel that if we started as a communist nation we would still have a lot of those problems. The only difference being difference economic problems. And as for the last part you're right it doesn't really work but then again it works better than any other government. I must admit you've been a good opponent and I suppose the only thing left to say is good game.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fair enough. And likewise, it's always nice when a political debate retains its substance without falling into a shouting match.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have no idea how many of those I've had. So I suppose a thank you is in order, thanks for the debate good sir.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You're already a slave to your government.
You don't prove yourself in capitalism by being better, you do it by being manipulative, exploitative, and deceitful. I'm not defending communism, but it sure seems like everyone associates it with the injustices capitalism is already perpetuating.
Further, communism in theory has never been communism in practice. Most if not all historical "communist" parties were really fascist authoritarians falsely holding the flag of the working man in order to gain his trust.
I do understand communism and capitalism. Not everyone is an air-headed ignoramus who doesn't care to inform themselves. And you don't have to clarify your political ignorance, it's blindingly obvious.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I don't feel like a slave of the government either. We are talking about America right?
You could say that under capitalism you prove yourself by being manipulative deceitful and exloitative, but under communism you can never prove youself at all.
Lesser of two evils my friend.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
How in the hell is that the lesser?? If you truly believe that the raw capacity for one to rise above others justifies a society of manipulation and exploitation, then you are the worst kind of sociopath and I have no interest in debating you further.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Let's be serious here. It's not a question someone is always gonna rise above everyone else it's just how things are. The biggest lion rules the Savannah, the sheep dog herds the sheep, and the mightiest king rules the peasants.
Communism says things don't need to be that way, but everytime someone makes what they claim to be a communist society someone ends up ruling over everyone like a king. The only difference is that person is called a premier instead of a czar.
Obviously communism can't deliver on it's promise in this regard.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"It's just the way it is." said the complacent sheep.
No, communism can't deliver. That's why I'm not a communist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Until there is a better system there is nowhere else for the sheep to go.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If you think your only option is to sit around and wait for something better, rather than do what you can, however little, to advance humanity toward a better system, then you truly are a sheep.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I am actually really happy with the current system as I think most Americans are. I mean even someone living at the poverty line of $10,600 in the United States is in the top 14% of global incomes. Someone closer to me making $61,000 is in the top 10%. The U.S is a quarter of world nominal gdp and is number one in purchasing power parity. The rest of the world pretty much hangs on our every word politically and those that don't fear our unrivaled military might. We as Americans are pretty much at the top of the pyramid. How much better could things possibly get?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Complacency always has been the enemy of progress. Our situation is relatively good, but that doesn't make it good. The life of the poor in america will always look good in comparison to those starving in africa, that doesn't mean the american poor have it good. They have virtually no job security, many of which can't even find a job in todays market, and without health insurance, severe illness is almost certain death.
And personally, I don't take pride in our countries political dominance or military spending, I'm ashamed of it. Our imperial notions of expansion, money, power, and 'might is right' is a demonstration that our notions of human order have barely evolved beyond those of the roman empire.
And I don't imagine things getting much better until we've destroyed the pyramid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well I think we have to agree to disagree. If your unhappy with the system try and change it that is totally your right. People like me who are pretty happy with the current system are probably gonna keep going with what we got.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
All in america who have it well are fond of the system, in blissful ignorance of all those it forsakes.
Sadly, not all of us can enjoy the fruits of egocentrism.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess you could say it's selfish and it is, but we seem to live in a harsh and selfish world.
I don't think Americans are ignorant of what they have. I mean you ask joe public on the street, and he is convinced beyond a doubt that he lives in the "greatest country on earth."
Americans have decently strong isolationist feelings as well. It wasn't so long ago that Americans didn't want any part of the rest of the world. We have our empire between the oceans, and we tend to worry about ourselves. Is it so wrong to want to take care of ourselves and let the rest of the world do the same?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So you're saying it's better to just be harsh and selfish along with nature, rather than rise above it and progress beyond it to create a better way of life? So we should just remain animals forever? Kings and peasants, simpletons and savages, from here into eternity? If that's your preference, that's fine. But I can think of nothing in the universe more intellectually and philosophically revolting.
Americans aren't ignorant of what they have, they're just ignorant of everything else. After all, its a country where ones worth is entirely determined by how much shit they have.
Americans still don't want any part of the rest of the world. (Unless there's oil under it.) And I wouldn't take issue if the general american philosophy was to look out for oneself and let others do the same, but it's not. And the fact that you would even assume such easy-going simplicity of american political philosophy would otherwise demonstrate a complete and absolute ignorance of american foreign policy, had you not earlier spoke more accurately.
"The rest of the world pretty much hangs on our every word politically and those that don't fear our unrivaled military might."
What you see there as an admirable, powerful, and influential nation, I see as a global ethnocentric bully. One who claims that there is one superior way of living, and he is the only beholder of such. That he and his deserve to hoard the vast majority of wealth and resources, but the hard-working peasants are just leeches and parasites who only ever want more for themselves. And only the wise will see his wisdom, and all detractors are idealist fools and mindless barbarians, who, should they get too uppity, will face the might of his peasant-patrol (police officers) and ridiculously oversized military.
Then I get the pleasure of selfish moron after selfish moron telling me how great he is for allowing them to be such a complacent self-serving useless tool sheltered by ignorance and unburdened by concern for their fellow humans.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
As with most things beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I've never really believed that human beings are advancing or progressing down a path to some ideal state. Yes technology improves and yes people get smarter with the ability to store and retrieve knowledge, so we have all the changes that brings with it, but is the core component the human actually any different than a person from five hundred or even a thousand years ago? People waged war and lusted and stole and did the exact same things they do now. We all look back on them and think we are so much more advanced, but are we or are we the same people just with cars and laptops.
That aside it is written that Jesus shall return and rule over ten thousand years of peace. That to me means he will install a perfect system of government. God will succeed where man never could.
As for if the U.S. is isolationist or interventionist recently it has been very interventionist and the American people are not happy. The president and the Senate love to play foreign policy and with september 11th, the war on terror, and the now very apparent shortage of petroleum they have been given a lot of freedom to do so, but things will calm down again and the country is gonna focus back inward. The U.S. is never above taking what it wants by force and right now what it wants is oil. The U.S. always offers to buy something before it takes it however whether that's Hawaii, Indian land, Oil, or California. It's not exactly a shining moral trait, but it's something at least.
The U.S. meddles in world affairs, but it meddles remarkably little considering it is the only superpower atm. When China becomes a superpower compare their machinations to those of the United States and see if you still feel the same way. China has already starting flexing it's new status against the stagnating economy in europe.
I really don't think either political party in America feels that the workers are parasites or leeches. Liberals feel sort of motherly towards them and tries to get them the best deal possible. Conservatives are supposed to keep an eye on the big picture and warn this will bankrupt the country or this won't be sustainable. With the mess social security and medicare are in they are generally right. Still it takes both sides to balance the equation and that's why we have two sides.
As for the United States hoarding it really doesn't if anything it has a spending problem and it tries to buy up as much foreign production as possible. If the U.S. ever did start saving money entire foreign economies might go into a recession like China has recently simply because America stopped buying so much. The U.S. also produces a freakish amount of goods. We are responsible for 25-30% of world production that sort of justifies us consuming 24% of the worlds energy doesn't it. Entire nations would starve without U.S. agriculture.
The U.S. does push Democratic capitalism like a pimp pushes whores, but the U.S. is legitimately convinced it has the best system. It's not like we push Democracy and then run a dictatorship or jealously guard our system like some kind of trade secret. We pretty much put it out there and say hey check this out.
Very rarely does the U.S. violently put down a protest the Rodney King and Watts riot's being exceptions. The vast majority of protests are allowed to play themselves out peaceably.
Finally the idea that Americans are stupid and selfish. The dumb american stereotype is old and has been hashed out all over the internet. Basically it's a matter of opinion, and I am not gonna go over it here.
As for being selfish nothing could be further from the truth. No developed country approaches American giving. For example, in 1995 (the most recent year for which data is available), Americans gave, per capita, three and a half times as much to causes and charities as the French, seven times as much as the Germans, and 14 times as much as the Italians. Similarly, in 1998, Americans were 15 percent more likely to volunteer their time than the Dutch, 21 percent more likely than the Swiss, and 32 percent more likely than the Germans. These differences are not attributable to demographic characteristics such as education, income, age, sex, or marital status. On the contrary, if we look at two people who are identical in all these ways except that one is European and the other American, the probability is still far lower that the European will volunteer than the American.
America is a blessed nation and it's people know it. You could say we could give a lot more, but we are already leading in world charity. There are people who wish the United States wasn't a superpower or that it wasn't so independent of world opinion, but the United States is what it is and it seems to be doing the best with what it has been given.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Wow, honestly, you are the master of denial and sugar-coating. I'd love to hear you describe Nazi Germany some time.
I guess by your logic all thats left to do is pretend everything is okay and wait for Jesus. Sorry, pal. But if America is blessed by god, then god is an incompetant simpleton. Waiting and waiting on a non-existent magic wizard is not the solution to human order. As they say, two hands at work accomplish far more than a thousand clasped in prayer.
But I guess your fundamentalist christianity more than accounts for your severe egocentrism and self-concern. (We all know jesus was such a fan of the selfish.)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
As for religion I have my faith and you have whatever you have so agree to disagree.
Your throwing the word selfish around again even though I made it clear how much Americans give in charity annually and that the United States is number one in foreign aid.
You could say we simply give from abundance and that it's meaningless, but that doesn't explain why the trend stays the same when the finances are equal or why we are the number nation for volunteering.
How much more does the United States need to give before it passes your standards?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So there is a hypothetical amount that would saisfy you?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes. I simply don't believe that he who allows others to needlessly suffer while it is perfectly within his means to help can be considered in any way a good person. And a society which allows its citizens to needlessly suffer while it is perfectly within its means to help is in no way a good society. To me, this seems quite more in line with christianity than what you're saying.
Speaking of your superstitions, Jesus would never have called the poor lazy, or accuse them of just wanting handouts. And he damn sure never glorified wealth and greed, let alone say the two are even permissible. "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom." The bible even contains several verses which sound an awful lot like communism, and it doesn't take a theologian to realize that capitalism would appear an abomination to Jesus, the champion of the poor that he was.
Extreme wealth in the face of extreme poverty is bluntly egocentric, selfish, and immoral. Your own messiah knew this, and yet it takes an atheist like me to explain it to you.
That's all I really have to say. After realizing that I've spent all this time explaining my beliefs regarding philosophy and human order to a child who thinks we should stick our thumbs in our asses and wait for a wizard, I think I've wasted enough time.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Ha, no, I'm not a slave to my government. Please elaborate why you think that.
Now, let me say what I said earlier with more words because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying.
I rather have corrupt businesses that I can choose to work for instead of a corrupt government that force's me to work for them. Capitalism has it's flaws because it is operated by humans. But so is the government and politicians are usually far worse than businessmen.
If a man wants to become rich and finds a way to become rich then it is his right. The world is a mean place and often, you need to be mean right back. And if a man is content with being middle class he has the right to work for him, or if the job is unsatisfactory, somebody else. Just because somebody is incredibly rich doesn't mean you are poor. No matter the form, theory or real life, communism doesn't work. In communism and other forms of advanced socialism, there is no rich because everybody is poor.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Capitalism places money above all else. The ultimate goal of ones life within capitalism is to pursue more money. Anything and everything in a capitalist system is owned by someone, and all transference of ownership costs money, so to be without money is to be without your means of getting absolutely anything else. How do you get money? Continuous physical labor for the vast majority of your life. It's better than what we think of when we hear 'slavery', but it is systematic servitude none the less.
And who says anyone has a right to become wealthy by selfish disregard for the well-being of others? Capitalists? Who made the merchant class our moral and philosophical authority? Who made wealth our greatest virtue? They did. They bought their influence, they bought our country and our culture, and your role among their masses of useful idiots makes you their slave in mind as well as in body.
Furthermore, every citizen couldn't be poor unless the country tossed all of its resources in the ocean. And to assume that to evenly distribute resources spreads them too thinly thus rendering all in poverty is to vastly underestimate the general amount of resources a country has relative to its population. Whether its capitalism or communism, the problem is the concentration of wealth to the top resulting in plutocratic aristocracy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess we will have to agree to disagree because trying to make you realize how ignorant you sound is nearly hopeless. I like to work and prove myself in this world, you want handouts and the people more successful than you to be pulled down.
You are another failure of the American education system. Fed lies and twisted facts that all capitalist and conservatives are evil to get you on the side of liberals and socialism. Your understanding of how the real world works is minimal and I find it very sad because you seem to have the capacity to understand it.
The world is not a utopia made up of perfect and innocent people against the evil capitalist. Look around you, from the cities to the roads and other sections of national infrastructure was made possible with capitalism. Communism and other socialistic based nations cant claim that success. What works on paper rarely works in real life. Good day and I will leave it up to you if you want to continue this argument.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Answer to GodCock's comment bellow because this child blocked me, a typical liberal action.
Wow, you are more hopeless and far more ignorant than I thought. The reason I sought to cease this argument of ours is because I'd rather not be arguing until the end of the world. but I guess I can't have that choice now can I?
Also, how can I be cornered by your "flawless and superior" logic when you have given none. All you have done is say opinions, no direct facts and spout biased views of capitalism. Why won't you come back at me with a real answer that isn't just you rambling. All I see is a child that's crying over the fact that somebody else is more successful than him. Crying because life isn't easy. Crying because he actually needs to do some hard work in life to actually have one.
No, you are not in the real world. You are stuck in your fantasy, utopian land were everyone can live happily ever after, "equal", under their all powerful and omnipotent government. You are a sudo-intellect that believes himself a superior mind but in truth your opinions and ideals are faulty and biased. Good day.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
So this is what you and all other capitalists resort to once you've been logically cornered. "Stupid liberal, you're just not living in the real world!"
Ah yes, the "real" world that you idiots love to pull out whenever you've lost an argument. The "real" world, where all dreams and aspirations die, where all concepts of a peaceful and enjoyable lives are hippie fairy tales, where all progress comes to a screeching halt, where we only do what we've gotta do, never what we wanna do. Where we just sit and sigh accepting every big fat corporate cock shoved into our asses every day, because hey, that's just the way it is. And that's the way it'll always be, so long as the majority remains stupid complacent subservient sheep like you.
I repeat, Useful idiot. No other term will ever define you more completely and absolutely.
Now get back to work, slave. Clearly it's all you're good for, as your mind is useless.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>