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.
You are the one "begging the question". Why do you believe it does?So you think the "Commerce Clause" legalizes slavery?!?you are the one begging that question. We have a Commerce Clause.Slavery is immoral. Which begs the question - why are you left-winger so desperate to enslave everyone?
Yes, government policy is command economics. only the right wing, never gets it.Well that's insanely idiotic - even by your normal standards. Waging a war against terror, crime, or drugs are not "socialism". Do you not understand what that term means? You were proclaiming the left engages in (and I quote) "national socialism". I pointed out that every idiotic socialist legislation in U.S. history was left-wing. You're best response to that indisputable fact was "our wars on crime, drugs, and terror are worse". What do any of those have to do with the fact that you were 100% wrong as usual?special pleading much? our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror, are worse.Socialism is exclusively left-wing, snowflake. Who passed Obamacare? Who passed welfare? Who passed Social Security? Who passed Medicaid?dude; those are Your policies. Socialism on a national basis is all the right wing has.And that stupidity right there is why we're $20 trillion in debt and have lost most of our liberties.The US has the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World. The rich can even keep their multimillion dollar bonuses while on means tested corporate welfare and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.
Are any of those constitutional? Nope! Do they cost over $1 trillion per year - more than double the defense budget? Yep!
Do you look really stupid right now? Yes! Do we all wonder why you keep coming back for more? Yep.
Well duh. When someone makes a comment as astoundingly stupid as "the commerce clause legalizes slavery" it requires intelligent people to ask questions.You are the one "begging the question".So you think the "Commerce Clause" legalizes slavery?!?you are the one begging that question. We have a Commerce Clause.Slavery is immoral. Which begs the question - why are you left-winger so desperate to enslave everyone?
It's "government policy" to arrest, prosecute, and imprison murders. What does that have to do with the economy?Yes, government policy is command economics.
Even in socialism people move up the career ladder when they are excel in their job. Your few cases of from rag to riches do not mean everyone has the choice to become rich. You are glorifying a system and don´t allow criticism. We all were billionaires if it was true what you say. The best mix of socialism and capitalism has to be found and applied.I don´t agree.And I would argue that all of those ghettos and projects, and abandoned neighborhoods, are not examples of Capitalism, but rather of socialism.
The most obvious being the "projects". What do you think "projects" means? It's government public housing. Well if government is running it, paying for it, controlling it.... that's not Capitalism. That's socialism.
All the 'projects' that have failed across this country, can't be blamed on capitalism, because under capitalism, they never would have existed.
Slums and ghettos in the US, I would also argue are largely due to government. One of the primary reasons people stay poor, is because government teaches them to live off government. Which again... is socialism. Not Capitalism. Capitalism, people live off their work.
Most of these slums and ghettos, the majority of the people are living off of welfare, and food stamps, and section 8 housing. In fact one of the quickest ways to create a slum, is to make the area section 8.
Back in the 90s, I worked at Wendy's, and a lady came in, and told us she had to work X number of days until she could get back on Welfare, and then she was gone. Sure enough on the day she qualified for welfare, she stopped showing up for work.
The number one way any person moves up out of poverty, is by working, which gives them experience and skills, to move up the income chain.
Quitting because you qualify for welfare, means that you never get beyond entry level. Which means you stay in poverty, and the slums, for life.
It's a system that only exists because of socialism. Socialism, literally harms everyone. Capitalism benefits everyone.
Welfare, and other government programs, not only harm the welfare recipient, but it also harms all the working people who have to pay for the welfare recipient, and not only that it also harms the fabric of society, because working people hate the lazy slob not working, and the lazy slob hates the working people.
Socialism is the socioeconomic version of cancer, that destroys everything it touches.
It is capitalism. Capitalism accumulates so much wealth on a small group of people that some are unable to pay for their own livelihood and need assistance even if they have two or three jobs. If you say no we do not make projects, those people would not disappear but pose an even larger problem. Pure capitalism.The most obvious being the "projects". What do you think "projects" means? It's government public housing. Well if government is running it, paying for it, controlling it.... that's not Capitalism. That's socialism.
Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.Slums and ghettos in the US, I would also argue are largely due to government. One of the primary reasons people stay poor, is because government teaches them to live off government. Which again... is socialism. Not Capitalism. Capitalism, people live off their work.
No, not the majority. In some, maybe. Government welfare is a tool to deal with the insufficiencies of capitalism. Capitalism and civilization are opposites. This is not a plea against market economy but against the law of the jungle.Most of these slums and ghettos, the majority of the people are living off of welfare, and food stamps, and section 8 housing. In fact one of the quickest ways to create a slum, is to make the area section 8.
That smart woman knows there is no from rag to riches. Her behavior is capitalist and aims to get the most out of the least. She does what you are actually demanding.Back in the 90s, I worked at Wendy's, and a lady came in, and told us she had to work X number of days until she could get back on Welfare, and then she was gone. Sure enough on the day she qualified for welfare, she stopped showing up for work.
The number one way any person moves up out of poverty, is by working, which gives them experience and skills, to move up the income chain.
Quitting because you qualify for welfare, means that you never get beyond entry level. Which means you stay in poverty, and the slums, for life.
I don´t agree.
You have the right to be wrong.
It is capitalism. Capitalism accumulates so much wealth on a small group of people that some are unable to pay for their own livelihood and need assistance even if they have two or three jobs. If you say no we do not make projects, those people would not disappear but pose an even larger problem. Pure capitalism.
Wrong. Not true.
Capitalism does not require, or cause, people to be unable to pay for their own livelihood.
What capitalism does, is allow people to make choices. In socialism, in the pre-78 China, I have to work in the rice fields for the rest of my life. I don't have a choice in the matter. Which allows you to only earn as much as me, and we all get the same wage, some shelter, same food, same life. We have no hope, and no future. We are born poor, live poor, and die poor.
But.... we have a guaranteed income.
In Capitalism, you choose what you do. If you work at Burger King until you die, flipping whoopers, then you live a meager life until you die. But you don't have to. No one has to. They can choose to do something else.
Doug McMillon current CEO of walmart, started of working in the distribution center, unloading trucks. Seasonal job, during the summer, earning a few bucks and hour, unloading trucks.
Did he stay there? No, he went to college, got a degree, learned management skills, and then applied to move up to a new position. Then a another position. And kept moving every year or two, to a new spot in the company, and now he's CEO.
And here's the real kicker of Capitalism. Everyone is a capitalist. I'm a capitalist. You are a capitalist.
The only difference between the rich capitalist, and the poor capitalist, is whether they choose to invest their money, or blow it. If you spend all your money, you'll be the poor capitalist. If you invest your money, you'll be the rich capitalist, even if you make very little relatively speaking.
Janitor secretly amassed an $8 million fortune, left most of it to library and hospital
This guy worked as a janitor his entire life. End up with $8 Million. How? Saved and invested. Real simple. He saved up money, and invested into stocks of companies he liked.
Do you know Warren Buffet got to where he is? When he was in high school, he saved up money from a paper route, and bought a pinball machine. He then placed the pinball machine in a local business where it made more money.
Anyone can be a Buffet. Anyone. It's simply that people choose not to. I have a co-worker that bought a bran new car, on 24% interest, because he just couldn't stand not having a new car any longer. He's destined to be poor.
Years and years ago, a had a roommate, that spent every single penny they earned, from Friday's check, until they were flat broke by Thursday. I tried to give some simple advice, that saving up some money would be wise, and I was told I was being 'critical' of them.
So I never said anything again. Then their alternator blew on their car, and they has absolutely no money to fix it.
This is Capitalism. They earned more money than be by far, yet they were broke, and I had cash in the bank.
Capitalism is freedom of people to make choices and reap the consequences of those choices. For me, the choice to live frugally and invest, means I have cash in the bank, and stocks in large corporations.... even though I earned just $19,000 last year.
For others, Capitalism is the freedom to blow their money on things they desire, and have no money left.
Point being, "capitalism" doesn't cause wealth to accumulated in the hands of the few. The freedom of people, causes wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few.
Socialism is simply denying people the ability to choose. When you take away choices, and make people slaves of the state, then magically everyone has the same level of wealth. Granted... an impoverished amount of wealth... but at least it's equal impoverishment... right?
Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.
Nah, that's garbage. It's not even logical. Many socialist systems had slaves. Soviets were massive numbers of slavers, and unlike American slave owners, literally worked them to death, some cases intentionally. So was Maoist China.
If anything, a fundamental aspect of Capitalism, is property rights. How can you ever have capitalism, if you can't own property? Well if you are slave, that undermines the core aspect of property rights. Slaves can't own other things.
So by it's nature, slavery subverts Capitalism. And that's about the only connection between capitalism and slavery.
No, not the majority. In some, maybe. Government welfare is a tool to deal with the insufficiencies of capitalism. Capitalism and civilization are opposites. This is not a plea against market economy but against the law of the jungle.
Nearly all. Not some, or even a minority. Nearly all. Hilliard is a small suburb, and even here we introduced a section 8 housing area, and already it's a disaster. Police are there all the time. The place is trashed. I'm currently supporting an effort to force the city to close the section 8, and get rid of the dope smoking hoodlums there.
I don't really care what you call it. Fact is, it causes the very thing you claim it exists to remedy.
During the welfare reform of the 1990s, the local station sent a reporter to dig up one of these people that was going to get cut off. She found some lady, and she was saying she'll have to get a job, and the reporter asked "How devastating will this be for you and your kids?"
The lady responded "Oh we'll be better off. I'll have more money for the family when I get a job"
The reporter was shocked.... stuttered a bit "Well uh... Why didn't you get a job sooner?"
"I didn't have to".
Government programs do not help people out of poverty. They keep people in poverty. You don't help anyone. You harm everyone. You harm them, by keeping them in poverty. You harm us, the people who work paying for your crappy programs. And you harm society, because we hate those lazy ticks sucking the blood out of our butts, and they hate us because living off government strips away dignity and pride of providing for ones self.
There is not one good aspect to your programs, except that it allows you to live inside the myth that you are good person because someone ELSE is paying money to the poor.
That smart woman knows there is no from rag to riches. Her behavior is capitalist and aims to get the most out of the least. She does what you are actually demanding
Completely illogical statement. In a Capitalists system of voluntary exchange, she would not be able to force others to pay for her being lazy.
You are just stupid now. You want to just make up random personal definitions of words, so you can live in the make-believe that it fits your argument?
If you can't argue logically, then you are disqualified from this discussion.
In fact, pure naked capitalism has halted human progress in Europe for centuries. Strong governments like Rome on the other hand rose.Just think about that statement for a moment. It's as absurd as saying "the sun results in total darkness".Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.
By its very nature - pure capitalism is pure liberty. Rules are slavery. They tell a person what they can and can't do. When someone else is deciding for you what you can and can't do - you're not in complete control of your own life. That's a part of slavery.
As we can sum up, capitalist slavery is the result from an absence of rules.
You know that sounds kinda silly. At first, there is no benefit of money if you don´t spend it. Second, a pinball machine does not earn bullions. Third, if all would buy a pinball machine, nobody would spend money at a pinball machine.Even in socialism people move up the career ladder when they are excel in their job. Your few cases of from rag to riches do not mean everyone has the choice to become rich. You are glorifying a system and don´t allow criticism. We all were billionaires if it was true what you say. The best mix of socialism and capitalism has to be found and applied.I don´t agree.And I would argue that all of those ghettos and projects, and abandoned neighborhoods, are not examples of Capitalism, but rather of socialism.
The most obvious being the "projects". What do you think "projects" means? It's government public housing. Well if government is running it, paying for it, controlling it.... that's not Capitalism. That's socialism.
All the 'projects' that have failed across this country, can't be blamed on capitalism, because under capitalism, they never would have existed.
Slums and ghettos in the US, I would also argue are largely due to government. One of the primary reasons people stay poor, is because government teaches them to live off government. Which again... is socialism. Not Capitalism. Capitalism, people live off their work.
Most of these slums and ghettos, the majority of the people are living off of welfare, and food stamps, and section 8 housing. In fact one of the quickest ways to create a slum, is to make the area section 8.
Back in the 90s, I worked at Wendy's, and a lady came in, and told us she had to work X number of days until she could get back on Welfare, and then she was gone. Sure enough on the day she qualified for welfare, she stopped showing up for work.
The number one way any person moves up out of poverty, is by working, which gives them experience and skills, to move up the income chain.
Quitting because you qualify for welfare, means that you never get beyond entry level. Which means you stay in poverty, and the slums, for life.
It's a system that only exists because of socialism. Socialism, literally harms everyone. Capitalism benefits everyone.
Welfare, and other government programs, not only harm the welfare recipient, but it also harms all the working people who have to pay for the welfare recipient, and not only that it also harms the fabric of society, because working people hate the lazy slob not working, and the lazy slob hates the working people.
Socialism is the socioeconomic version of cancer, that destroys everything it touches.
It is capitalism. Capitalism accumulates so much wealth on a small group of people that some are unable to pay for their own livelihood and need assistance even if they have two or three jobs. If you say no we do not make projects, those people would not disappear but pose an even larger problem. Pure capitalism.The most obvious being the "projects". What do you think "projects" means? It's government public housing. Well if government is running it, paying for it, controlling it.... that's not Capitalism. That's socialism.
Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.Slums and ghettos in the US, I would also argue are largely due to government. One of the primary reasons people stay poor, is because government teaches them to live off government. Which again... is socialism. Not Capitalism. Capitalism, people live off their work.
No, not the majority. In some, maybe. Government welfare is a tool to deal with the insufficiencies of capitalism. Capitalism and civilization are opposites. This is not a plea against market economy but against the law of the jungle.Most of these slums and ghettos, the majority of the people are living off of welfare, and food stamps, and section 8 housing. In fact one of the quickest ways to create a slum, is to make the area section 8.
That smart woman knows there is no from rag to riches. Her behavior is capitalist and aims to get the most out of the least. She does what you are actually demanding.Back in the 90s, I worked at Wendy's, and a lady came in, and told us she had to work X number of days until she could get back on Welfare, and then she was gone. Sure enough on the day she qualified for welfare, she stopped showing up for work.
The number one way any person moves up out of poverty, is by working, which gives them experience and skills, to move up the income chain.
Quitting because you qualify for welfare, means that you never get beyond entry level. Which means you stay in poverty, and the slums, for life.
I don´t agree.
You have the right to be wrong.
It is capitalism. Capitalism accumulates so much wealth on a small group of people that some are unable to pay for their own livelihood and need assistance even if they have two or three jobs. If you say no we do not make projects, those people would not disappear but pose an even larger problem. Pure capitalism.
Wrong. Not true.
Capitalism does not require, or cause, people to be unable to pay for their own livelihood.
What capitalism does, is allow people to make choices. In socialism, in the pre-78 China, I have to work in the rice fields for the rest of my life. I don't have a choice in the matter. Which allows you to only earn as much as me, and we all get the same wage, some shelter, same food, same life. We have no hope, and no future. We are born poor, live poor, and die poor.
But.... we have a guaranteed income.
In Capitalism, you choose what you do. If you work at Burger King until you die, flipping whoopers, then you live a meager life until you die. But you don't have to. No one has to. They can choose to do something else.
Doug McMillon current CEO of walmart, started of working in the distribution center, unloading trucks. Seasonal job, during the summer, earning a few bucks and hour, unloading trucks.
Did he stay there? No, he went to college, got a degree, learned management skills, and then applied to move up to a new position. Then a another position. And kept moving every year or two, to a new spot in the company, and now he's CEO.
And here's the real kicker of Capitalism. Everyone is a capitalist. I'm a capitalist. You are a capitalist.
The only difference between the rich capitalist, and the poor capitalist, is whether they choose to invest their money, or blow it. If you spend all your money, you'll be the poor capitalist. If you invest your money, you'll be the rich capitalist, even if you make very little relatively speaking.
Janitor secretly amassed an $8 million fortune, left most of it to library and hospital
This guy worked as a janitor his entire life. End up with $8 Million. How? Saved and invested. Real simple. He saved up money, and invested into stocks of companies he liked.
Do you know Warren Buffet got to where he is? When he was in high school, he saved up money from a paper route, and bought a pinball machine. He then placed the pinball machine in a local business where it made more money.
Anyone can be a Buffet. Anyone. It's simply that people choose not to. I have a co-worker that bought a bran new car, on 24% interest, because he just couldn't stand not having a new car any longer. He's destined to be poor.
Years and years ago, a had a roommate, that spent every single penny they earned, from Friday's check, until they were flat broke by Thursday. I tried to give some simple advice, that saving up some money would be wise, and I was told I was being 'critical' of them.
So I never said anything again. Then their alternator blew on their car, and they has absolutely no money to fix it.
This is Capitalism. They earned more money than be by far, yet they were broke, and I had cash in the bank.
Capitalism is freedom of people to make choices and reap the consequences of those choices. For me, the choice to live frugally and invest, means I have cash in the bank, and stocks in large corporations.... even though I earned just $19,000 last year.
For others, Capitalism is the freedom to blow their money on things they desire, and have no money left.
Point being, "capitalism" doesn't cause wealth to accumulated in the hands of the few. The freedom of people, causes wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few.
Socialism is simply denying people the ability to choose. When you take away choices, and make people slaves of the state, then magically everyone has the same level of wealth. Granted... an impoverished amount of wealth... but at least it's equal impoverishment... right?
Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.
Nah, that's garbage. It's not even logical. Many socialist systems had slaves. Soviets were massive numbers of slavers, and unlike American slave owners, literally worked them to death, some cases intentionally. So was Maoist China.
If anything, a fundamental aspect of Capitalism, is property rights. How can you ever have capitalism, if you can't own property? Well if you are slave, that undermines the core aspect of property rights. Slaves can't own other things.
So by it's nature, slavery subverts Capitalism. And that's about the only connection between capitalism and slavery.
No, not the majority. In some, maybe. Government welfare is a tool to deal with the insufficiencies of capitalism. Capitalism and civilization are opposites. This is not a plea against market economy but against the law of the jungle.
Nearly all. Not some, or even a minority. Nearly all. Hilliard is a small suburb, and even here we introduced a section 8 housing area, and already it's a disaster. Police are there all the time. The place is trashed. I'm currently supporting an effort to force the city to close the section 8, and get rid of the dope smoking hoodlums there.
I don't really care what you call it. Fact is, it causes the very thing you claim it exists to remedy.
During the welfare reform of the 1990s, the local station sent a reporter to dig up one of these people that was going to get cut off. She found some lady, and she was saying she'll have to get a job, and the reporter asked "How devastating will this be for you and your kids?"
The lady responded "Oh we'll be better off. I'll have more money for the family when I get a job"
The reporter was shocked.... stuttered a bit "Well uh... Why didn't you get a job sooner?"
"I didn't have to".
Government programs do not help people out of poverty. They keep people in poverty. You don't help anyone. You harm everyone. You harm them, by keeping them in poverty. You harm us, the people who work paying for your crappy programs. And you harm society, because we hate those lazy ticks sucking the blood out of our butts, and they hate us because living off government strips away dignity and pride of providing for ones self.
There is not one good aspect to your programs, except that it allows you to live inside the myth that you are good person because someone ELSE is paying money to the poor.
That smart woman knows there is no from rag to riches. Her behavior is capitalist and aims to get the most out of the least. She does what you are actually demanding
Completely illogical statement. In a Capitalists system of voluntary exchange, she would not be able to force others to pay for her being lazy.
You are just stupid now. You want to just make up random personal definitions of words, so you can live in the make-believe that it fits your argument?
If you can't argue logically, then you are disqualified from this discussion.
Yes, actually it does mean that. Everyone can be rich. Everyone can. Every single person has the ability to live on less than they make, and save and invest.
Again, Warren Buffet didn't become a billionaire by random chance, or by excessive brilliance. He simply didn't blow his money on crap. It's the Pinball people verses the Beer Pong people. When I was in high school, the popular thing to do was find some guy whose parents were going out of town or something, buy a keg of beer with your money, and play beer pong all weekend. (I lived in a middle class area).
Of course all of them were flat broke, even though they all worked jobs, because they spent everything they had on beer, video games, and of course those useless overpriced shoes and jackets.
Warren Buffet, in high school, was saving money from a paper route, and buying pinball machine, so that he could earn more money. He was investing. Not consuming.
People consume all their money, then wonder why they are poor.
I make barely $20,000. Yet I have several thousand in the bank, and thousands in stocks. (invested through a couple of mutual funds in aggressive growth stocks) I've met people that make double what I do, and have no money.
And, under socialism, yes some people can move up the income ladder..... namely by moving up the political party. People promoted without skill or ability, but have the right connections. China famously had a guy make friends with a politician, and was elected to run a steel mill. The employees furious that this nobody that had a "friend" in high places, was now their boss, beat him to death.
Che Guevara famously put one of his buddies in charge of the Sugar cane fields. Of course he had no idea how to run the plantations, and production dropped dramatically.
So yeah, you can work your way up the income ladder in a Socialized system. It's called "corruption" in our country, but whatever floats your boat.
I actually claim that Capitalism needs rules.In fact, pure naked capitalism has halted human progress in Europe for centuries. Strong governments like Rome on the other hand rose.Just think about that statement for a moment. It's as absurd as saying "the sun results in total darkness".Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.
By its very nature - pure capitalism is pure liberty. Rules are slavery. They tell a person what they can and can't do. When someone else is deciding for you what you can and can't do - you're not in complete control of your own life. That's a part of slavery.
As we can sum up, capitalist slavery is the result from an absence of rules.
No, that's wrong. Pure capitalism, is not pure liberty. Because if you have pure liberty, there is no confines of justices and property rights.
If I can't own anything..... that in, and of itself.... prevents the capitalist system. You have to have the ability to own something. And the rights of ownership, have to be protected.
If I can legally own something, but it doesn't matter because anyone can steal it, or take it by force... then regardless of what the law says I still have no property rights. So under that situation there still is no capitalism.
None of that is capitalism. You can't have capitalism without law, and law enforcement. Doesn't work.
Your basic claim is fundamentally illogical and ridiculous.
it is Your question. You are the one, begging that question. that is why, i don't take the right wing seriously.Well duh. When someone makes a comment as astoundingly stupid as "the commerce clause legalizes slavery" it requires intelligent people to ask questions.You are the one "begging the question".So you think the "Commerce Clause" legalizes slavery?!?you are the one begging that question. We have a Commerce Clause.Slavery is immoral. Which begs the question - why are you left-winger so desperate to enslave everyone?
command economics, not free market spending. Only the right wing, never gets it.It's "government policy" to arrest, prosecute, and imprison murders. What does that have to do with the economy?Yes, government policy is command economics.
(Hint: nothing)
You want so desperately to convince everyone that we already have a "planned economy" so that you can work toward an actual planned economy. It's not working snowflake. Unfortunately for you, we're all exponentially smarter than you are.
Like the right wing would know, when all they have, is nothing but repeal, instead of better solutions at lower cost.Nothing ends in failure like left-wing policy...
Obama Tried to Placate Rebellious Students. It Backfired.
Why don't you just call it what it is? Communism.command economics, not free market spending.
Because drugs have a major impact on our world. A "mission to Mars" would do nothing except fulfill your bizarre little fantasies.We got a War on Drugs instead of a market friendly, Mission to Mars
Because "repeal" results in constitutional government. We obey the law - unlike you power-hungry criminals.Like the right wing would know, when all they have, is nothing but repeal, instead of better solutions at lower cost.
Our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror are simply that form of socialism on a national basis.Why don't you just call it what it is? Communism.command economics, not free market spending.
Just socialism on a national basis. The right wing, merely likes to waste money repeating historical mistakes, and then claiming they are not really like that, afterward.Because drugs have a major impact on our world. A "mission to Mars" would do nothing except fulfill your bizarre little fantasies.We got a War on Drugs instead of a market friendly, Mission to Mars
so could a better solution at lower cost. Only the right has Only, repeal.Because "repeal" results in constitutional government. We obey the law - unlike you power-hungry criminals.Like the right wing would know, when all they have, is nothing but repeal, instead of better solutions at lower cost.
You know that sounds kinda silly. At first, there is no benefit of money if you don´t spend it. Second, a pinball machine does not earn bullions. Third, if all would buy a pinball machine, nobody would spend money at a pinball machine.Even in socialism people move up the career ladder when they are excel in their job. Your few cases of from rag to riches do not mean everyone has the choice to become rich. You are glorifying a system and don´t allow criticism. We all were billionaires if it was true what you say. The best mix of socialism and capitalism has to be found and applied.I don´t agree.And I would argue that all of those ghettos and projects, and abandoned neighborhoods, are not examples of Capitalism, but rather of socialism.
The most obvious being the "projects". What do you think "projects" means? It's government public housing. Well if government is running it, paying for it, controlling it.... that's not Capitalism. That's socialism.
All the 'projects' that have failed across this country, can't be blamed on capitalism, because under capitalism, they never would have existed.
Slums and ghettos in the US, I would also argue are largely due to government. One of the primary reasons people stay poor, is because government teaches them to live off government. Which again... is socialism. Not Capitalism. Capitalism, people live off their work.
Most of these slums and ghettos, the majority of the people are living off of welfare, and food stamps, and section 8 housing. In fact one of the quickest ways to create a slum, is to make the area section 8.
Back in the 90s, I worked at Wendy's, and a lady came in, and told us she had to work X number of days until she could get back on Welfare, and then she was gone. Sure enough on the day she qualified for welfare, she stopped showing up for work.
The number one way any person moves up out of poverty, is by working, which gives them experience and skills, to move up the income chain.
Quitting because you qualify for welfare, means that you never get beyond entry level. Which means you stay in poverty, and the slums, for life.
It's a system that only exists because of socialism. Socialism, literally harms everyone. Capitalism benefits everyone.
Welfare, and other government programs, not only harm the welfare recipient, but it also harms all the working people who have to pay for the welfare recipient, and not only that it also harms the fabric of society, because working people hate the lazy slob not working, and the lazy slob hates the working people.
Socialism is the socioeconomic version of cancer, that destroys everything it touches.
It is capitalism. Capitalism accumulates so much wealth on a small group of people that some are unable to pay for their own livelihood and need assistance even if they have two or three jobs. If you say no we do not make projects, those people would not disappear but pose an even larger problem. Pure capitalism.The most obvious being the "projects". What do you think "projects" means? It's government public housing. Well if government is running it, paying for it, controlling it.... that's not Capitalism. That's socialism.
Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.Slums and ghettos in the US, I would also argue are largely due to government. One of the primary reasons people stay poor, is because government teaches them to live off government. Which again... is socialism. Not Capitalism. Capitalism, people live off their work.
No, not the majority. In some, maybe. Government welfare is a tool to deal with the insufficiencies of capitalism. Capitalism and civilization are opposites. This is not a plea against market economy but against the law of the jungle.Most of these slums and ghettos, the majority of the people are living off of welfare, and food stamps, and section 8 housing. In fact one of the quickest ways to create a slum, is to make the area section 8.
That smart woman knows there is no from rag to riches. Her behavior is capitalist and aims to get the most out of the least. She does what you are actually demanding.Back in the 90s, I worked at Wendy's, and a lady came in, and told us she had to work X number of days until she could get back on Welfare, and then she was gone. Sure enough on the day she qualified for welfare, she stopped showing up for work.
The number one way any person moves up out of poverty, is by working, which gives them experience and skills, to move up the income chain.
Quitting because you qualify for welfare, means that you never get beyond entry level. Which means you stay in poverty, and the slums, for life.
I don´t agree.
You have the right to be wrong.
It is capitalism. Capitalism accumulates so much wealth on a small group of people that some are unable to pay for their own livelihood and need assistance even if they have two or three jobs. If you say no we do not make projects, those people would not disappear but pose an even larger problem. Pure capitalism.
Wrong. Not true.
Capitalism does not require, or cause, people to be unable to pay for their own livelihood.
What capitalism does, is allow people to make choices. In socialism, in the pre-78 China, I have to work in the rice fields for the rest of my life. I don't have a choice in the matter. Which allows you to only earn as much as me, and we all get the same wage, some shelter, same food, same life. We have no hope, and no future. We are born poor, live poor, and die poor.
But.... we have a guaranteed income.
In Capitalism, you choose what you do. If you work at Burger King until you die, flipping whoopers, then you live a meager life until you die. But you don't have to. No one has to. They can choose to do something else.
Doug McMillon current CEO of walmart, started of working in the distribution center, unloading trucks. Seasonal job, during the summer, earning a few bucks and hour, unloading trucks.
Did he stay there? No, he went to college, got a degree, learned management skills, and then applied to move up to a new position. Then a another position. And kept moving every year or two, to a new spot in the company, and now he's CEO.
And here's the real kicker of Capitalism. Everyone is a capitalist. I'm a capitalist. You are a capitalist.
The only difference between the rich capitalist, and the poor capitalist, is whether they choose to invest their money, or blow it. If you spend all your money, you'll be the poor capitalist. If you invest your money, you'll be the rich capitalist, even if you make very little relatively speaking.
Janitor secretly amassed an $8 million fortune, left most of it to library and hospital
This guy worked as a janitor his entire life. End up with $8 Million. How? Saved and invested. Real simple. He saved up money, and invested into stocks of companies he liked.
Do you know Warren Buffet got to where he is? When he was in high school, he saved up money from a paper route, and bought a pinball machine. He then placed the pinball machine in a local business where it made more money.
Anyone can be a Buffet. Anyone. It's simply that people choose not to. I have a co-worker that bought a bran new car, on 24% interest, because he just couldn't stand not having a new car any longer. He's destined to be poor.
Years and years ago, a had a roommate, that spent every single penny they earned, from Friday's check, until they were flat broke by Thursday. I tried to give some simple advice, that saving up some money would be wise, and I was told I was being 'critical' of them.
So I never said anything again. Then their alternator blew on their car, and they has absolutely no money to fix it.
This is Capitalism. They earned more money than be by far, yet they were broke, and I had cash in the bank.
Capitalism is freedom of people to make choices and reap the consequences of those choices. For me, the choice to live frugally and invest, means I have cash in the bank, and stocks in large corporations.... even though I earned just $19,000 last year.
For others, Capitalism is the freedom to blow their money on things they desire, and have no money left.
Point being, "capitalism" doesn't cause wealth to accumulated in the hands of the few. The freedom of people, causes wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few.
Socialism is simply denying people the ability to choose. When you take away choices, and make people slaves of the state, then magically everyone has the same level of wealth. Granted... an impoverished amount of wealth... but at least it's equal impoverishment... right?
Capitalism needs rules because it would result in slavery. Ghettos are the result of capitalist slavery in America´s early years. Also, Ghettos result from a lack of government.
Nah, that's garbage. It's not even logical. Many socialist systems had slaves. Soviets were massive numbers of slavers, and unlike American slave owners, literally worked them to death, some cases intentionally. So was Maoist China.
If anything, a fundamental aspect of Capitalism, is property rights. How can you ever have capitalism, if you can't own property? Well if you are slave, that undermines the core aspect of property rights. Slaves can't own other things.
So by it's nature, slavery subverts Capitalism. And that's about the only connection between capitalism and slavery.
No, not the majority. In some, maybe. Government welfare is a tool to deal with the insufficiencies of capitalism. Capitalism and civilization are opposites. This is not a plea against market economy but against the law of the jungle.
Nearly all. Not some, or even a minority. Nearly all. Hilliard is a small suburb, and even here we introduced a section 8 housing area, and already it's a disaster. Police are there all the time. The place is trashed. I'm currently supporting an effort to force the city to close the section 8, and get rid of the dope smoking hoodlums there.
I don't really care what you call it. Fact is, it causes the very thing you claim it exists to remedy.
During the welfare reform of the 1990s, the local station sent a reporter to dig up one of these people that was going to get cut off. She found some lady, and she was saying she'll have to get a job, and the reporter asked "How devastating will this be for you and your kids?"
The lady responded "Oh we'll be better off. I'll have more money for the family when I get a job"
The reporter was shocked.... stuttered a bit "Well uh... Why didn't you get a job sooner?"
"I didn't have to".
Government programs do not help people out of poverty. They keep people in poverty. You don't help anyone. You harm everyone. You harm them, by keeping them in poverty. You harm us, the people who work paying for your crappy programs. And you harm society, because we hate those lazy ticks sucking the blood out of our butts, and they hate us because living off government strips away dignity and pride of providing for ones self.
There is not one good aspect to your programs, except that it allows you to live inside the myth that you are good person because someone ELSE is paying money to the poor.
That smart woman knows there is no from rag to riches. Her behavior is capitalist and aims to get the most out of the least. She does what you are actually demanding
Completely illogical statement. In a Capitalists system of voluntary exchange, she would not be able to force others to pay for her being lazy.
You are just stupid now. You want to just make up random personal definitions of words, so you can live in the make-believe that it fits your argument?
If you can't argue logically, then you are disqualified from this discussion.
Yes, actually it does mean that. Everyone can be rich. Everyone can. Every single person has the ability to live on less than they make, and save and invest.
Again, Warren Buffet didn't become a billionaire by random chance, or by excessive brilliance. He simply didn't blow his money on crap. It's the Pinball people verses the Beer Pong people. When I was in high school, the popular thing to do was find some guy whose parents were going out of town or something, buy a keg of beer with your money, and play beer pong all weekend. (I lived in a middle class area).
Of course all of them were flat broke, even though they all worked jobs, because they spent everything they had on beer, video games, and of course those useless overpriced shoes and jackets.
Warren Buffet, in high school, was saving money from a paper route, and buying pinball machine, so that he could earn more money. He was investing. Not consuming.
People consume all their money, then wonder why they are poor.
I make barely $20,000. Yet I have several thousand in the bank, and thousands in stocks. (invested through a couple of mutual funds in aggressive growth stocks) I've met people that make double what I do, and have no money.
And, under socialism, yes some people can move up the income ladder..... namely by moving up the political party. People promoted without skill or ability, but have the right connections. China famously had a guy make friends with a politician, and was elected to run a steel mill. The employees furious that this nobody that had a "friend" in high places, was now their boss, beat him to death.
Che Guevara famously put one of his buddies in charge of the Sugar cane fields. Of course he had no idea how to run the plantations, and production dropped dramatically.
So yeah, you can work your way up the income ladder in a Socialized system. It's called "corruption" in our country, but whatever floats your boat.
While Capitalism does indeed provide more chances to become rich, it also provides more chances to become poor. It is ignorant to say all those workers and poor could have been millionaires. Socialism on the other hand prevents you from falling out of the society. There are no barrel ovens, bums, starving people.
If I am investing my money it is not going into your pinball machine, right? It is totally irrelevant in what I invest. It is not going into your pinball machine.Don't be so dense. What is wrong with you? You really think the only way to make money is pinball machines?
Workers can´t put their money at risk. They have to do a living.Point is, you can make money doing almost.... almost ANYTHING.
Both get food stamps. However, Cuba is sanctioned, has no access to the global trade. So it is sanctions in the first place that do harm the country,The poor of Cuba live lives that would be astonishing to the poor of America. Our poor live like royalty compared to the Socialist poor.
Propaganda. The private food companies run short the food. A capitalist and anti-social, anti-civilization measure to create the crisis to mount pressure on the government and profit from the crisis.Parents in socialist Venezuela are literally..... LITERALLY giving away their children. Because they are flat out.... starving to death.
Actually, if capitalism would make rich, socialism would not exist, would not have been invented. A socialist company does not fire people. People cannot get fired in socialism. And if the cake has 6 pieces in socialism, it will be shared by 6 people, not by one. In fact, true socialism means the rule of the workers, capitalism means the rule of the industrialists and bankers. What´s more democratic?You tax away our money, then claim "see capitalism makes people poor". No, socialism makes people poor.
