So you want better paying jobs?

[Correll]

People who do the work or at least are closer to the work are more likely to understand the issues, and make better decisions, IMO, than some politician or bureaucrat far, far away.

You can assert that it is simply "bad management" but that does not make you case. It is merely your personal unsupported opinion.

AND I have already pointed out that a good system has provisions for replacing bad management. YOu have ignored this point.

It is part of the Freedom aspect of the difference that you care so little about.

The people of West Germany and South Korea were Free to change their leaders when they were "bad management" while in East Germany and NOrth Korea they were NOT FREE to do so.

Yes; not achieving goals for any organization is simple bad management. There is no PC way say it.

Or maybe there are fundamental flaws in the underlying principles of the "organization" in question.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to that idea before.

not sure what you mean; any flaws in organization is simple, bad management.

One of the basic principles of Communism is Common Ownership of the Means of Production.

This eliminated the Profit motive from the list of possible incentives to work or innovate.

This is a fundamental flaw in the system of Communism that hinders Wealth Creation in Communistic societies regardless of quality of management.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to this idea before.

What is credible is that you have managed to dismiss this idea every time you have been exposed to it.

This reflects an extremely closed mind.

How would that work in a "commune of Heaven"?

Don't you believe it is why Socialism and Religion, require social morals for free.

What you are declaiming, is any Faith in a god through that form of social, not capital, hard work.

I was discussing a real flaw in Communism as it has existed in the real world.

Discussing how it would work in a hypothetical "commune of Heaven" does not change the fact that I presented to you, for comment, a basic flaw in the principles of Communism that hinders wealth creation. A flaw way beyond simple "bad management".

Which, the reversal of which in the US system encouraged long term Wealth Creation despite occasional episodes of "bad management".

Will you please respond to my point, instead of deflecting?

 

[Correll]

We keep hearing about this "widening gap between rich and poor" which has been the nucleus of an ongoing argument for higher wages, living wages, increasing the minimum wage, more taxation on "the wealthy" or whatever. They come armed with graphs and charts... the statistics to show you the middle class is in decline... the wealthy continue to amass great fortunes while the poor struggle to survive. Our hearts bleed as we're lectured on how we need more government regulations, more agencies and programs, more forced wage hikes and mandates, more restrictions and regulations heaped on big business in order to force them to pay up!

The problem is, we're hearing this from morons who don't understand how free market capitalism works. Oh, not all of them are illiterate morons, some have read books by European socialist propagandists and think they have everything all figured out. They don't seem to understand socialism doesn't work in practice like it works on paper. Every significant sized Socialist nation has failed and most of them have failed hideously. The ideas of people like Marx and Mao are responsible for ten's of millions of deaths. It is clearly a failed ideology by every standard.

Let's first dispatch a few myths and misconceptions. Wealthy people tend to gain wealth faster than poor people because they have a propensity for wealth acquisition... it's how they became wealthy for the most part. So it is perfectly natural in a free market capitalist system for the wealthiest to gain wealth faster than everyone else. It's like having a marathon race where there are runners who are seasoned veteran marathoners, runners who are couch potatoes, and some who run for the fun of it.... Now, in an actual race, who would you expect to lead and eventually win? The couch potato? Of course not... the seasoned vets are constantly going to gain more ground than the couch potatoes... that's perfectly natural and expected. The solution to the problem is not to hobble the veterans so they don't run as fast... the better idea would be to motivate the couch potatoes... train them up... make them better able to compete... turn them into veteran runners.

So this is where the idea of increasing their wages comes... but it's not as simple as merely passing some legislation that corporations MUST pay people $X per hour... that does not work in free market capitalism. What happens is, everything is on a sliding scale, so people make more but things cost more... so very shortly, we are back to square one. So come on Boss... get to the point... how do we increase the rate of pay for the average American in the average job without disrupting free market capitalism or causing inflation?

In order to increase pay you have to increase the demand for labor. In order to do that, you have to create new jobs. Not just new service sector, minimum wage, government or part-time jobs... but real, good paying, legitimate jobs. The way to do that is to encourage expansion of business... this requires taking several steps... lower taxes on corporations... or eliminate corporate tax altogether. Offer tax incentives for repatriated wealth... we have over $20 trillion in US wealth abroad... not doing us a bit of good. Let's bring it home and put it to work creating new business and new jobs. Finally, our trade deals need to account for the disparity in cost of labor. We can't compete with countries who pay their workers $1 a day and a bowl of rice... unless that's the standard we want to live with ourselves. Our trade policies have to take this into consideration and we have to apply tougher tariffs on import goods so our American companies can again compete domestically.

For example, let's use a computer keyboard... If you go to the store today to buy one, you will likely pay around $20 for a standard keyboard which is probably made in Indonesia. Now... An American company, with American workers and paying American taxes, can't buy the materials and assemble said keyboard for $20, much less sell it for that and make a profit. A similar American-made keyboard would be probably $40 or more. So if you have the choice to buy the same keyboard for $20 or $40... which would you likely purchase? Most people aren't going to care about where it's made, money is the deciding factor. However... IF you applied a tariff on Indonesian keyboards of say, $10 each... then the price of the Indonesian keyboard is $30 and the US company has the opportunity to compete... they cut some corners use some competitive ingenuity and manage to whittle their price down to $35... now you have a choice between a cheaply-made Indonesian keyboard for $30 or one that is built to last by Americans for $35. Some will still pick the cheaper keyboard but some will go with the quality.

Now my example is a little exaggerated, we'd never apply a 50% tariff on something... but the point is making imports more expensive so that American companies can compete again. When we change this dynamic, jobs will begin to generate as a result.. more jobs = more demand for labor = higher wages.

Tariffs are socialist. They are taxes designed to protect labor and restrict individual choice by squeezing out foreign competition. That's why labor unions support tariffs pretty much everywhere.

Yet, this is what Donald Trump proposes. And his "conservative" supporters cheer him on.

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

 

[danielpalos]

I merely assert that it is simple bad management that prevents command economies from command economizing their way to prosperity.

But you have NO evidence of it in a country our size because an example doesn't exist. What has somehow become termed as "bad management" is very often plain old garden variety corruption. Communist systems become corrupt. Those responsible for seeing the wealth is redistributed, find ways to redistribute it to their pockets or the pockets of their friends and family. Furthermore, nothing can be done about the corruption because the people in charge of that are same people. It is a thoroughly failed system that hasn't ever worked outside a few isolated Scandinavian countries with small localized populations and no illegal immigration.

not sure what you mean; a nation-State our size can Only exist via the socialism of a mixed-market economy, not True Capitalism.

Ahh yes... this is where deceivers try to insinuate some elements of a free market capitalist system are actually "socialist" in nature. (But they're not.) All the examples of "socialism" you can cite in our free market system are examples of cooperatives. This is where free market capitalists agree on mutual benefit and establish things they can all share and live with for the better good.

Ahh yes...this is where the fullers of fallacy who don't have a clue or a Cause try to insinuate any Thing other than hearsay and soothsay.

Socialism starts with a social Contract such as a Constitution.

There is no "free market" under any form of Statism.

We have a Commerce Clause.

 

[Toro]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes; not achieving goals for any organization is simple bad management. There is no PC way say it.

Or maybe there are fundamental flaws in the underlying principles of the "organization" in question.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to that idea before.

not sure what you mean; any flaws in organization is simple, bad management.

One of the basic principles of Communism is Common Ownership of the Means of Production.

This eliminated the Profit motive from the list of possible incentives to work or innovate.

This is a fundamental flaw in the system of Communism that hinders Wealth Creation in Communistic societies regardless of quality of management.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to this idea before.

What is credible is that you have managed to dismiss this idea every time you have been exposed to it.

This reflects an extremely closed mind.

How would that work in a "commune of Heaven"?

Don't you believe it is why Socialism and Religion, require social morals for free.

What you are declaiming, is any Faith in a god through that form of social, not capital, hard work.

I was discussing a real flaw in Communism as it has existed in the real world.

Discussing how it would work in a hypothetical "commune of Heaven" does not change the fact that I presented to you, for comment, a basic flaw in the principles of Communism that hinders wealth creation. A flaw way beyond simple "bad management".

Which, the reversal of which in the US system encouraged long term Wealth Creation despite occasional episodes of "bad management".

Will you please respond to my point, instead of deflecting?

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

 

[Correll]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

Calling Mercantilism "Socialist" is like calling chocolate Cheesecake matter.

Under some definitions of the word is might be technically true, but it hard conveys how tasty it is.

Hell, you could call having cops and prisons "socialistic", if you wanted to.

Doesn't mean people who want to have cops are "supporting socialism".

 

[Toro]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

Calling Mercantilism "Socialist" is like calling chocolate Cheesecake matter.

Under some definitions of the word is might be technically true, but it hard conveys how tasty it is.

Hell, you could call having cops and prisons "socialistic", if you wanted to.

Doesn't mean people who want to have cops are "supporting socialism".

It's socialism.

 

[Correll]

Or maybe there are fundamental flaws in the underlying principles of the "organization" in question.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to that idea before.

not sure what you mean; any flaws in organization is simple, bad management.

One of the basic principles of Communism is Common Ownership of the Means of Production.

This eliminated the Profit motive from the list of possible incentives to work or innovate.

This is a fundamental flaw in the system of Communism that hinders Wealth Creation in Communistic societies regardless of quality of management.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to this idea before.

What is credible is that you have managed to dismiss this idea every time you have been exposed to it.

This reflects an extremely closed mind.

How would that work in a "commune of Heaven"?

Don't you believe it is why Socialism and Religion, require social morals for free.

What you are declaiming, is any Faith in a god through that form of social, not capital, hard work.

I was discussing a real flaw in Communism as it has existed in the real world.

Discussing how it would work in a hypothetical "commune of Heaven" does not change the fact that I presented to you, for comment, a basic flaw in the principles of Communism that hinders wealth creation. A flaw way beyond simple "bad management".

Which, the reversal of which in the US system encouraged long term Wealth Creation despite occasional episodes of "bad management".

Will you please respond to my point, instead of deflecting?

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

You keep using increasingly obtuse rhetoric and poor sentence structure to run and hide from honest and serious debate.

 

[Correll]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

Calling Mercantilism "Socialist" is like calling chocolate Cheesecake matter.

Under some definitions of the word is might be technically true, but it hard conveys how tasty it is.

Hell, you could call having cops and prisons "socialistic", if you wanted to.

Doesn't mean people who want to have cops are "supporting socialism".

It's socialism.

i don't care if it is Satanism. I'm tired of being the world's bitch when it comes to trade.

THe purpose of ideology is to find principles that aid in making good policy when time or facts are short.

Free Trade Ideology is not serving US interests and has not for sometime.

Either there is a flaw in the ideology or in it's application.

Either way, time to try something else.

Complaining about ideological purity does not raise wages for the US middle class.

 

[danielpalos]

not sure what you mean; any flaws in organization is simple, bad management.

One of the basic principles of Communism is Common Ownership of the Means of Production.

This eliminated the Profit motive from the list of possible incentives to work or innovate.

This is a fundamental flaw in the system of Communism that hinders Wealth Creation in Communistic societies regardless of quality of management.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to this idea before.

What is credible is that you have managed to dismiss this idea every time you have been exposed to it.

This reflects an extremely closed mind.

How would that work in a "commune of Heaven"?

Don't you believe it is why Socialism and Religion, require social morals for free.

What you are declaiming, is any Faith in a god through that form of social, not capital, hard work.

I was discussing a real flaw in Communism as it has existed in the real world.

Discussing how it would work in a hypothetical "commune of Heaven" does not change the fact that I presented to you, for comment, a basic flaw in the principles of Communism that hinders wealth creation. A flaw way beyond simple "bad management".

Which, the reversal of which in the US system encouraged long term Wealth Creation despite occasional episodes of "bad management".

Will you please respond to my point, instead of deflecting?

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

You keep using increasingly obtuse rhetoric and poor sentence structure to run and hide from honest and serious debate.

morals too difficult a concept; i got it, Person on the Right.

 

[danielpalos]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

Calling Mercantilism "Socialist" is like calling chocolate Cheesecake matter.

Under some definitions of the word is might be technically true, but it hard conveys how tasty it is.

Hell, you could call having cops and prisons "socialistic", if you wanted to.

Doesn't mean people who want to have cops are "supporting socialism".

It's socialism.

i don't care if it is Satanism. I'm tired of being the world's bitch when it comes to trade.

THe purpose of ideology is to find principles that aid in making good policy when time or facts are short.

Free Trade Ideology is not serving US interests and has not for sometime.

Either there is a flaw in the ideology or in it's application.

Either way, time to try something else.

Complaining about ideological purity does not raise wages for the US middle class.

We have a Commerce Clause. Why complain instead of merely insist on the Faithful execution of our own laws?

 

[Toro]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

Calling Mercantilism "Socialist" is like calling chocolate Cheesecake matter.

Under some definitions of the word is might be technically true, but it hard conveys how tasty it is.

Hell, you could call having cops and prisons "socialistic", if you wanted to.

Doesn't mean people who want to have cops are "supporting socialism".

It's socialism.

i don't care if it is Satanism. I'm tired of being the world's bitch when it comes to trade.

THe purpose of ideology is to find principles that aid in making good policy when time or facts are short.

Free Trade Ideology is not serving US interests and has not for sometime.

Either there is a flaw in the ideology or in it's application.

Either way, time to try something else.

Complaining about ideological purity does not raise wages for the US middle class.

You have never taken a class in economics, have you?

 

[Correll]

One of the basic principles of Communism is Common Ownership of the Means of Production.

This eliminated the Profit motive from the list of possible incentives to work or innovate.

This is a fundamental flaw in the system of Communism that hinders Wealth Creation in Communistic societies regardless of quality of management.

It is not credible that you have never been exposed to this idea before.

What is credible is that you have managed to dismiss this idea every time you have been exposed to it.

This reflects an extremely closed mind.

How would that work in a "commune of Heaven"?

Don't you believe it is why Socialism and Religion, require social morals for free.

What you are declaiming, is any Faith in a god through that form of social, not capital, hard work.

I was discussing a real flaw in Communism as it has existed in the real world.

Discussing how it would work in a hypothetical "commune of Heaven" does not change the fact that I presented to you, for comment, a basic flaw in the principles of Communism that hinders wealth creation. A flaw way beyond simple "bad management".

Which, the reversal of which in the US system encouraged long term Wealth Creation despite occasional episodes of "bad management".

Will you please respond to my point, instead of deflecting?

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

You keep using increasingly obtuse rhetoric and poor sentence structure to run and hide from honest and serious debate.

morals too difficult a concept; i got it, Person on the Right.

Don't compound your dishonesty.

I made a point you could not refute so you ran.

I would be happy to discuss the morality of Capitalism vs Communism, vs Socialism anytime.

But not when it is a dodge to avoid acknowledging the vast Wealth Creation that is on the plus side of the Capitalistic US system.

 

[Correll]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

Calling Mercantilism "Socialist" is like calling chocolate Cheesecake matter.

Under some definitions of the word is might be technically true, but it hard conveys how tasty it is.

Hell, you could call having cops and prisons "socialistic", if you wanted to.

Doesn't mean people who want to have cops are "supporting socialism".

It's socialism.

i don't care if it is Satanism. I'm tired of being the world's bitch when it comes to trade.

THe purpose of ideology is to find principles that aid in making good policy when time or facts are short.

Free Trade Ideology is not serving US interests and has not for sometime.

Either there is a flaw in the ideology or in it's application.

Either way, time to try something else.

Complaining about ideological purity does not raise wages for the US middle class.

We have a Commerce Clause. Why complain instead of merely insist on the Faithful execution of our own laws?

Our laws are the problem.

We have bad Trade and Immigration policy.

THey need to be changed to more effectively serve US interests.

 

[Correll]

Tariffs historically have more often been mercantilistic, ie desinged to protect the profits of business owners and investors.

Currently, modern business has adapted to using outsourcing to avoid high wages and costs here in the US.

That modern labor unions support this is an example of how they have sold out their members in favor of their political allies the democrats.

i.e. Donald Trump supports socialism.

Calling Mercantilism "Socialist" is like calling chocolate Cheesecake matter.

Under some definitions of the word is might be technically true, but it hard conveys how tasty it is.

Hell, you could call having cops and prisons "socialistic", if you wanted to.

Doesn't mean people who want to have cops are "supporting socialism".

It's socialism.

i don't care if it is Satanism. I'm tired of being the world's bitch when it comes to trade.

THe purpose of ideology is to find principles that aid in making good policy when time or facts are short.

Free Trade Ideology is not serving US interests and has not for sometime.

Either there is a flaw in the ideology or in it's application.

Either way, time to try something else.

Complaining about ideological purity does not raise wages for the US middle class.

You have never taken a class in economics, have you?

Save the spin, and make your point.

 

[danielpalos]

How would that work in a "commune of Heaven"?

Don't you believe it is why Socialism and Religion, require social morals for free.

What you are declaiming, is any Faith in a god through that form of social, not capital, hard work.

I was discussing a real flaw in Communism as it has existed in the real world.

Discussing how it would work in a hypothetical "commune of Heaven" does not change the fact that I presented to you, for comment, a basic flaw in the principles of Communism that hinders wealth creation. A flaw way beyond simple "bad management".

Which, the reversal of which in the US system encouraged long term Wealth Creation despite occasional episodes of "bad management".

Will you please respond to my point, instead of deflecting?

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

You keep using increasingly obtuse rhetoric and poor sentence structure to run and hide from honest and serious debate.

morals too difficult a concept; i got it, Person on the Right.

Don't compound your dishonesty.

I made a point you could not refute so you ran.

I would be happy to discuss the morality of Capitalism vs Communism, vs Socialism anytime.

But not when it is a dodge to avoid acknowledging the vast Wealth Creation that is on the plus side of the Capitalistic US system.

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

 

[Correll]

I was discussing a real flaw in Communism as it has existed in the real world.

Discussing how it would work in a hypothetical "commune of Heaven" does not change the fact that I presented to you, for comment, a basic flaw in the principles of Communism that hinders wealth creation. A flaw way beyond simple "bad management".

Which, the reversal of which in the US system encouraged long term Wealth Creation despite occasional episodes of "bad management".

Will you please respond to my point, instead of deflecting?

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

You keep using increasingly obtuse rhetoric and poor sentence structure to run and hide from honest and serious debate.

morals too difficult a concept; i got it, Person on the Right.

Don't compound your dishonesty.

I made a point you could not refute so you ran.

I would be happy to discuss the morality of Capitalism vs Communism, vs Socialism anytime.

But not when it is a dodge to avoid acknowledging the vast Wealth Creation that is on the plus side of the Capitalistic US system.

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

WTF are you talking about and how does it relate to what we were talking about before, ie Wealth Creation?

 

[danielpalos]

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

You keep using increasingly obtuse rhetoric and poor sentence structure to run and hide from honest and serious debate.

morals too difficult a concept; i got it, Person on the Right.

Don't compound your dishonesty.

I made a point you could not refute so you ran.

I would be happy to discuss the morality of Capitalism vs Communism, vs Socialism anytime.

But not when it is a dodge to avoid acknowledging the vast Wealth Creation that is on the plus side of the Capitalistic US system.

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

WTF are you talking about and how does it relate to what we were talking about before, ie Wealth Creation?

capital wealth creation is not the Only form of creation of wealth.

 

[Correll]

You keep using increasingly obtuse rhetoric and poor sentence structure to run and hide from honest and serious debate.

morals too difficult a concept; i got it, Person on the Right.

Don't compound your dishonesty.

I made a point you could not refute so you ran.

I would be happy to discuss the morality of Capitalism vs Communism, vs Socialism anytime.

But not when it is a dodge to avoid acknowledging the vast Wealth Creation that is on the plus side of the Capitalistic US system.

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

WTF are you talking about and how does it relate to what we were talking about before, ie Wealth Creation?

capital wealth creation is not the Only form of creation of wealth.

I did not claim that it was.

Do I take it you are done with this conversation, because it did not go the way you wanted it to?

 

[danielpalos]

morals too difficult a concept; i got it, Person on the Right.

Don't compound your dishonesty.

I made a point you could not refute so you ran.

I would be happy to discuss the morality of Capitalism vs Communism, vs Socialism anytime.

But not when it is a dodge to avoid acknowledging the vast Wealth Creation that is on the plus side of the Capitalistic US system.

you keep missing the point about socialism. it requires social morals for free, not capital morals for a price.

in other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.

WTF are you talking about and how does it relate to what we were talking about before, ie Wealth Creation?

capital wealth creation is not the Only form of creation of wealth.

I did not claim that it was.

Do I take it you are done with this conversation, because it did not go the way you wanted it to?

n other words, we are simply not moral enough to a god, to be able to benefit from divine intervention in a Commune of Heaven on Earth.