Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So we should put a heavy tax on the poor and give them an incentive to get rich?Poverty must be made less attractive and that will do more to end income inequality than anything else.
However, I doubt many Americans would want to live in your right wing utopia whose motto is survival of fittest.
The answer is yes. Think about that.However, I doubt many Americans would want to live in your right wing utopia whose motto is survival of fittest.
Actually thats from Darwin. Would you want to live in a world wherein survival of the least fit was the motto? Think about it and talk it over with your parents. Let us know what you conclude.
So we should put a heavy tax on the poor and give them an incentive to get rich?Poverty must be made less attractive and that will do more to end income inequality than anything else.
Take away food stamps, welfare, child support, and Medicaid and they will work for $5/day like the Chinese. We will have full employment and America will be able to compete with third countries. However, I doubt many Americans would want to live in your right wing utopia whose motto is survival of fittest.
Ah, we agree now that inequity is fine and it's stupid to say it's why "50 million+ are economically hurting". We can cut to a new blunder.The issue is not that there is an income gap. There has always been an income gap. The issue is the gap is growing and that threatens the middle class which is the backbone of our society....crazy. Not every product is equal and not every worker shows up on time and works hard. People are different so incomes have to be unequal....focus on inequity because 50 million+ are economically hurting...
You say no one needs to be taxed? So how do we finance government? I suppose in your plan there is no need for government since there is only one law, the law of jungle where only the strongest survive.So we should put a heavy tax on the poor and give them an incentive to get rich?Poverty must be made less attractive and that will do more to end income inequality than anything else.
Take away food stamps, welfare, child support, and Medicaid and they will work for $5/day like the Chinese. We will have full employment and America will be able to compete with third countries. However, I doubt many Americans would want to live in your right wing utopia whose motto is survival of fittest.
Taxes don't solve everything. No one needs to be taxed. However, IF people actually experienced the consequences of their actions and decisions they would make different decisions and take different actions.
Survival of the fittest is the only way to assure fitness.
A growing income inequality in America is no Marxists gimmick. It's fact. You need only look at the census data to see it.Ah, we agree now that inequity is fine and it's stupid to say it's why "50 million+ are economically hurting". We can cut to a new blunder.The issue is not that there is an income gap. There has always been an income gap. The issue is the gap is growing and that threatens the middle class which is the backbone of our society....crazy. Not every product is equal and not every worker shows up on time and works hard. People are different so incomes have to be unequal.
Growing income inequality it a Marxist gimmick for blaming achievers for harm caused by Marxists.
In open markets price ranges are set by free people making trades, and the process leads to prosperity. Living people are creative and that makes price ranges increase as humanity attains new heights. This applies to both price ranges for products as well as for labor. Marxists want to steal the wealth that market workers create and imagine that they can make a workers paradise where labor and other prices don't change.
It's crazy. New and better products come out all the time and new and more valuable worker skills appear every day. Over time people have always changed for the better so ranges of incomes have to become more unequal.
Hey, we're not talking economics here, were talking about envy, resentment, jealousy, and covetousness. This is sick.
--meaning it must be completely under state control?...An income gap is healthy as long the gap is not widening...
A growing income inequality in America is no Marxists gimmick. It's fact.
Libs have a big hard on for more spending money...
So they will still go after the rich...
When that doesn't satisfy them they will move on down the food chain.
They will never be happy unless they have some cash to play with.
Yes. Tariffs and unions, as in what the Germans have been and are doing. Must be a terribly bad economy in Germany.I can't see any single government edict or policy that can "fix" that problem.
To do that we'd need tariffs and unions.
That is clearly not the direction this nation is headed.
Tariffs and unions? God save us all, you've just listed the perfect way to economic suicide.
Ahh. A Libertarian. Most libertarian repent by the time they reach puberty. So, which country is it that has managed to have a good libertarian economy. You know, one with wealth spread and low unemployment. As in a country that does not become a cesspool?So we should put a heavy tax on the poor and give them an incentive to get rich?Poverty must be made less attractive and that will do more to end income inequality than anything else.
Take away food stamps, welfare, child support, and Medicaid and they will work for $5/day like the Chinese. We will have full employment and America will be able to compete with third countries. However, I doubt many Americans would want to live in your right wing utopia whose motto is survival of fittest.
Taxes don't solve everything. No one needs to be taxed. However, IF people actually experienced the consequences of their actions and decisions they would make different decisions and take different actions.
Survival of the fittest is the only way to assure fitness.
Said like the true con tool that you are.Ah, we agree now that inequity is fine and it's stupid to say it's why "50 million+ are economically hurting". We can cut to a new blunder.The issue is not that there is an income gap. There has always been an income gap. The issue is the gap is growing and that threatens the middle class which is the backbone of our society....crazy. Not every product is equal and not every worker shows up on time and works hard. People are different so incomes have to be unequal.
Growing income inequality it a Marxist gimmick for blaming achievers for harm caused by Marxists.
In open markets price ranges are set by free people making trades, and the process leads to prosperity. Living people are creative and that makes price ranges increase as humanity attains new heights. This applies to both price ranges for products as well as for labor. Marxists want to steal the wealth that market workers create and imagine that they can make a workers paradise where labor and other prices don't change.
It's crazy. New and better products come out all the time and new and more valuable worker skills appear every day. Over time people have always changed for the better so ranges of incomes have to become more unequal.
Hey, we're not talking economics here, were talking about envy, resentment, jealousy, and covetousness. This is sick.
Yes. Tariffs and unions, as in what the Germans have been and are doing. Must be a terribly bad economy in Germany.I can't see any single government edict or policy that can "fix" that problem.
To do that we'd need tariffs and unions.
That is clearly not the direction this nation is headed.
Tariffs and unions? God save us all, you've just listed the perfect way to economic suicide.
Oops, but the Germans have one of the best economies in the world. Could Wiseacre be wrong. But of course he can. Usually is.
So, which country is it that has managed to have a good libertarian economy.
