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.
Did you come up with that all by yourself? Or was it a c&p from some left wing hack unionist blog?There Is No ‘Income Inequality’
Utter rubbish once again, just as with your claim that poverty didn't exist.
Not only does income inequality exist, it is a functional part of a capitalistic system! To claim otherwise is to blind yourself to a hundred reasons why one person moves "up the ladder" while another one with equal skills, experience and ability does not. There are so many gimmicks rigged into our system which rewards one person for playing within a corrupt system while excluding others because they either do not or cannot.
I won't even begin to try to list all the factors that go into whether you even get an interview, much less hired, promoted, offered an opportunity, equal or fair pay because the list is so long. Employers got you by the balls and you are either screwed over or get ahead via corruption, insider friends, or the like. Americans could very well be the most overworked and underpaid people in the 1st World.
I'll leave it to the reader to cogitate the problem and decide for themselves, but I would guess that less than 10% of ouyr population even finds work not only in something they WANT to do and like, but which is even a good utilization of their best talents!
Your post, is proof positive that inside of every liberal, there is a conservative screaming to get out.So you didn't say "...to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals...?"And then everything will operate efficiently, in our best interests, and FREEEE!!!Maybe so but laws are not passed and taxes are not levied without the shitheads elected to government voting on it.
The legislators may very well be owned by the oligarchy. That is even a more compelling reason to have my more robust Bill of Rights protecting us from those that would oppress us and make slaves to the state of us.
We need three things to get this country in order.
1. A new Bill of Rights assuring personal Liberty and minimal government interference in our lives.
2. A real right to keep and bear arms that makes the government weenies fear the people.
3. The will to resist tyrannical government.
The Founding Fathers thoughts they had provided us with the first two but were unsure about the third. When asked what kind of government they gave us Ben Franklin answered "A Republic, if you can keep it".
When you look at this gloated Liberty robbing government we have now you know that we don't have the courage to protect our Liberty. If we did there would be a lot of tar and feathering going on.
None of that really seems functional to me. I am more practical. For instance, to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals, not giving insurance companies checks to keep perpetuating the same current payola.
I tell ya, there is nothing more naive than a big gov't leftard.
Nothing in my post said anything to indicate that private hospitals and insurance could not exist. There is nothing more greedy than a big gov't righttard who is too chickenshit scared about introducing competition into the marketplace.
I tell ya, there is nothing dimmer than a big gov't leftard.
I didn't say take the damn hospitals. There is no higher walled garden than medical in most places. Injecting competition into the market, including buying up hospitals, puts downward pressure on pricing and provides the government a vehicle to provide care for the poor and indigent more effectively. There are few companies that can run hospitals into the ground faster than for-profits like Lifepoint that specializes in acquiring hospitals in areas where there is zero competition.
Not even going to dignify that drivel with a response.Bs. For example, back before corporations had the option to move their plants to Mexico, labor could organize and demand a fair wage.The fundamental problem with all democratic "solutions" is that they still preserve the economic structures that created the inequality to begin with. That is a fancy way of saying they ain't rocking Wall Street's boat.
A middle class emerged. But the rich caught back. Slowly from the late 70s to now the rich have been getting richer with their economic policies and the middle class has disappeared
Nafta, invented by bush and fully supported by republicans
Jobs Americans won’t do saved the rich billions and cost the middle class billions
Buying cheap shit from China.
Tax breaks for the rich
Rising healthcare costs
Cuts to social programs.
The rich are doing great. Maga
So you didn't say "...to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals...?"And then everything will operate efficiently, in our best interests, and FREEEE!!!Maybe so but laws are not passed and taxes are not levied without the shitheads elected to government voting on it.
The legislators may very well be owned by the oligarchy. That is even a more compelling reason to have my more robust Bill of Rights protecting us from those that would oppress us and make slaves to the state of us.
We need three things to get this country in order.
1. A new Bill of Rights assuring personal Liberty and minimal government interference in our lives.
2. A real right to keep and bear arms that makes the government weenies fear the people.
3. The will to resist tyrannical government.
The Founding Fathers thoughts they had provided us with the first two but were unsure about the third. When asked what kind of government they gave us Ben Franklin answered "A Republic, if you can keep it".
When you look at this gloated Liberty robbing government we have now you know that we don't have the courage to protect our Liberty. If we did there would be a lot of tar and feathering going on.
None of that really seems functional to me. I am more practical. For instance, to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals, not giving insurance companies checks to keep perpetuating the same current payola.
I tell ya, there is nothing more naive than a big gov't leftard.
Nothing in my post said anything to indicate that private hospitals and insurance could not exist. There is nothing more greedy than a big gov't righttard who is too chickenshit scared about introducing competition into the marketplace.
I tell ya, there is nothing dimmer than a big gov't leftard.
I didn't say take the damn hospitals. There is no higher walled garden than medical in most places. Injecting competition into the market, including buying up hospitals, puts downward pressure on pricing and provides the government a vehicle to provide care for the poor and indigent more effectively. There are few companies that can run hospitals into the ground faster than for-profits like Lifepoint that specializes in acquiring hospitals in areas where there is zero competition.
you have yet to learn that I am never wrong.
Your post, is proof positive that inside of every liberal, there is a conservative screaming to get out.So you didn't say "...to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals...?"And then everything will operate efficiently, in our best interests, and FREEEE!!!None of that really seems functional to me. I am more practical. For instance, to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals, not giving insurance companies checks to keep perpetuating the same current payola.
I tell ya, there is nothing more naive than a big gov't leftard.
Nothing in my post said anything to indicate that private hospitals and insurance could not exist. There is nothing more greedy than a big gov't righttard who is too chickenshit scared about introducing competition into the marketplace.
I tell ya, there is nothing dimmer than a big gov't leftard.
I didn't say take the damn hospitals. There is no higher walled garden than medical in most places. Injecting competition into the market, including buying up hospitals, puts downward pressure on pricing and provides the government a vehicle to provide care for the poor and indigent more effectively. There are few companies that can run hospitals into the ground faster than for-profits like Lifepoint that specializes in acquiring hospitals in areas where there is zero competition.
look no further than the federal government and the medical lobby, the AMA, insurance companies and the pharma industry as to the reasons why our system by which medical care is dispensed is a train wreck.
If medical care facilities, medical professionals and insurance companies were forced to compete in an open and level marketplace, the term "health care" would be forever buried in the 8th sub basement of an obscure building in downtown Washington DC....
Not even going to dignify that drivel with a response.Bs. For example, back before corporations had the option to move their plants to Mexico, labor could organize and demand a fair wage.The fundamental problem with all democratic "solutions" is that they still preserve the economic structures that created the inequality to begin with. That is a fancy way of saying they ain't rocking Wall Street's boat.
A middle class emerged. But the rich caught back. Slowly from the late 70s to now the rich have been getting richer with their economic policies and the middle class has disappeared
Nafta, invented by bush and fully supported by republicans
Jobs Americans won’t do saved the rich billions and cost the middle class billions
Buying cheap shit from China.
Tax breaks for the rich
Rising healthcare costs
Cuts to social programs.
The rich are doing great. Maga
Other than this..For a twelve millionth time....Unions or organized labor, killed itself
Unionists exist in a time that has past.
They think in terms of "we still need typewriters"....They exist in old inefficient smoke stack plants.
Union leaders failed to adjust to technology which allowed productivity by technology to increase while requiring fewer people to produce the work.
Unions in a way are responsible for technological advancements in manufacturing and unions are also partly responsible for the existence of global competition.
So you didn't say "...to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals...?"And then everything will operate efficiently, in our best interests, and FREEEE!!!None of that really seems functional to me. I am more practical. For instance, to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals, not giving insurance companies checks to keep perpetuating the same current payola.
I tell ya, there is nothing more naive than a big gov't leftard.
Nothing in my post said anything to indicate that private hospitals and insurance could not exist. There is nothing more greedy than a big gov't righttard who is too chickenshit scared about introducing competition into the marketplace.
I tell ya, there is nothing dimmer than a big gov't leftard.
I didn't say take the damn hospitals. There is no higher walled garden than medical in most places. Injecting competition into the market, including buying up hospitals, puts downward pressure on pricing and provides the government a vehicle to provide care for the poor and indigent more effectively. There are few companies that can run hospitals into the ground faster than for-profits like Lifepoint that specializes in acquiring hospitals in areas where there is zero competition.
Injecting competition into the market, including buying up hospitals, puts downward pressure on pricing and provides the government a vehicle to provide care for the poor and indigent more effectively.
I don't remember Cook County Hospital making medical costs lower in Chicago than elsewhere in Illinois.
You have any stats to back up your feeling?
Well-known actually. Socialists of that time. The term was so vague didn't mean much. Definitely liberal and Christian. A lot of deists... The French enlightenment guys.So the GOP cutting of funding for University and training is a great idea then eh, brainwashed functional moron?Very true1.As any observant individual has found, Liberals/Democrats think with their heart, not with their head. Soooo… an effective propaganda tool to win unthinking individuals over, is to simply point out that not everyone has the same income, wealth, material assets.
Boo hoo!
My usual perspective, is ‘so what’??? There is no real poverty, that is poverty in the Dickensian sense in America….you’ve never had to step over bodies in the gutter on your way to work….if another’s home is bigger or their car is newer, that is no one else’s business, and certainly not government’s.
2. But the always perceptive and articulate Bill O’Reilly has a somewhat different….and insightful….take on the issue of income inequality.
Getting right to the heart of the matter, O’Reilly nails it: any inequality in outcome, in terms of wealth, can be traced back to the real problem: parental inequality.
3. “Bad parenting, not capitalism, is the main cause of “income inequality” in America. The left, including liberal educators, media, and politicians will never admit that, but it’s absolutely true.
…begin with education. If a young child is not exposed to learning by age two, that innocent, helpless person is already at risk in a competitive society. If there are no books in the home, no awareness-building games, no fun dialogue with the parents, the child may not develop a curiosity about life.
As the child gets older, parents must participate in the learning process - emphasizing the tremendous importance of academic discipline and monitor school work on a daily basis.
Millions of American parents simply refuse to do that.” Bill O'Reilly: Bill's Weekly Column Archive
4. An example of how fiercely Liberals/Democrats fight this idea: Reading to your children is racist and unfair for all of the other minority children - leftist science.
“Professor: If You Read To Your Kids, You’re ‘Unfairly Disadvantaging’ Others According to a professor at the University of Warwick in England, parents who read to their kids should be thinking about how they’re “unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children” by doing so.
In an interview with ABC Radio last week, philosopher and professor Adam Swift said that since “bedtime stories activities . . . do indeed foster and produce . . . [desired] familial relationship goods,” he wouldn’t want to ban them, but that parents who “engage in bedtime-stories activities” should definitely at least feel kinda bad about it sometimes:
“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,” he said.”
Professor: If You Read To Your Kids, You’re ‘Unfairly Disadvantaging’ Others | National Review
What is the result of this sort of Leftist bilge, vis-à-vis the struggle to give every child the same start for success???
Next.
1.Here......see what you think:
Imagine the reaction if the media reported daily that this 20 million cohort, supplemented by chain migration and family reunification mandates, would swell to 40 million or 50 million in a decade." How Many Illegal Immigrants Live in the US?
2. There are between 60 million and 80 million illegal aliens living in this country.
3. James H. Walsh, formerly an Associate General Counsel of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in the United States Department of Justice, writes
"... the U.S. Census Bureau routinely undercounts and then adjusts upward total census numbers of Hispanics and other foreign nationals residing in the United States––counting only, of course, those willing to be counted. For the year 2000, the Census Bureau reported a total U.S. population count of “about 275 million” men, women, and children.
When the states and local governments challenged that number as an undercount, the total was corrected upward to 281.4 million, with no clear count of illegal aliens. The Hispanic 2000 census count was 32.8 million, but on re-count the Census Bureau adjusted this number upward to 35.3 million, a 13 percent increase."
How many illegal aliens reside in the United States? | CAIRCO - Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform | issues legislation projects research
Increased the totals by 13%!!!
Now....hold on tight....this is gonna involve mathematics:
Soooo....if we apply that same 'adjustment' to the fabled 11 million....over a decade of so....we have almost 40 million.
But wait!!!
There's more!
4. Another way to arrive at the numbers of illegals in the country is to base it on the number of apprehensions and escapes.
"The average number of recorded apprehensions of illegal aliens in the United States now hovers at 1.2 million a year [in 2007]. A DHS report, Border Apprehensions: 2005, documented 1.3 million apprehensions in 2005. For the 10-year period (1996–2005), the highest number of apprehensions, 1.8 million, occurred in 2000, and the lowest, 1 million, in 2003. These DHS statistics contradict persistent statements by other government agencies that only 400,000 to 500,000 illegal aliens enter the country each year.
Journeymen Border Patrol agents (on the job five years or more) estimate that a minimum of five illegal aliens enter the United States for each apprehension, and more likely seven. That informed estimate would raise the total number of illegal aliens entering the United States in 2003 to 8 million men, women, and children.
He concludes that:
My estimate of 38 million illegal aliens residing in the United States is calculated, however, using a conservative annual rate of entry (allowing for deaths and returns to their homelands) of three illegal aliens entering the United States for each one apprehended. My estimate includes apprehensions at the Southern Border (by far, the majority), at the Northern Border, along the Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico coasts, and at seaports and airports.
5. Taking the DHS average of 1.2 million apprehensions per year and multiplying it by 3 comes to 3.6 million illegal entries per year; then multiplying that number by 10 for the 1996–2005 period, my calculations come to 36 million illegal entries into the United States. Add to this the approximately 2 million visa overstays during the same period, and the total is 38 million illegal aliens currently in the United States."
How many illegal aliens reside in the United States? | CAIRCO - Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform | issues legislation projects research
....and that number is over a decade old!!!!!!
6. But other Border Patrol agents estimate that a minimum of five illegal aliens enter the United States for each apprehension, and more likely seven......which would give a total of nearly 80 million illegals occupying our country.
The number of illegals would be at least.....at least.....60-80 million at this time.....permanently residing right here is this country.
That's why Hussein could take the chance and publicly tell them to go and vote.
7. “… there is the work ethic: if a child does not understand that accomplishment is based on performance, doom is nearby…”
The most succinct statement from the Liberal/Democrat perspective is that of former Massachusetts Attorney General Coakley: “ We try and discourage people from self help."
When Liberalism did away with personal responsibility…..the die was cast.
“The breakup of this 300-year-old consensus on the work ethic began with the cultural protests of the 1960s, which questioned and discarded many traditional American virtues.
By the 1960s, that modernist tendency had evolved into a credo of self-fulfillment in which “nothing is forbidden, all is to be explored,” Bell wrote. Out went the Protestant ethic’s prudence, thrift, temperance, self-discipline, and deferral of gratification. Weakened along with all these virtues that made up the American work ethic was Americans’ belief in the value of work itself. Along with “turning on” and “tuning in,” the sixties protesters also “dropped out.” As the editor of the 1973 American Work Ethic noted, “affluence, hedonism and radicalism” were turning many Americans away from work and the pursuit of career advancement…”
Whatever Happened to the Work Ethic?
Why work at all, or save, for that matter, if government promised to coddle you from cradle to grave????
How could the elimination of the work ethic not result in economic inequality???
Amen, and preach on Sis.8. “… the social aspect in America.
Parents failing to teach their kids proper grammar, table manners, polite behavior. Permissive mothers and fathers who allow children to be tattooed and pay for skin-piercings. Does anyone really think those things will lead to more economic opportunity?
Parents who set no boundaries, who embrace crude behavior in the home, who fail to supervise smart phones and computers, are now legion in the USA.
Add all that up and the heavy odds are the neglected child will not become well educated or be able to command much money in the marketplace.
Charlatans like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren tell us that the federal government will provide for children who are mistreated by their parents. That is a false promise. But republicans are misleading the country too, by failing to actively promote good parenting and self-reliance based on smart, disciplined behavior.
When was the last time the GOP put that in their platform? How about never.
It is too risky for politicians to call out bad parents, even though they are the primary source of generational failure. Too many judgements have to be made and, hey, it’s none of our business!
Income inequality will get worse in this country because parenting is getting worse. That is the cold truth that the presidential debates will never reveal. No political system can nurture individuals so they can achieve success if the basics of personal responsibility and education are absent.
And only parents can instill those basics.”
Bill O'Reilly: Bill's Weekly Column Archive
Can I get an ‘Amen’?
Our Constitution guarantees equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. But it's much easier to be a victim than to blame yourself for being lazy. And this is what the socialists play to.
But why did we sell out to Supply Side Economics
Cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government oversight all with the idea of a booming economy helping everyone
It never happened...the wealthy just kept the money increasing the wealth inequality
So why are we still doing it?
Let’s move our resources to helping working Americans with healthcare, education, retirement
Education?
You retarded liberals think 45% of American workers making minimum wage is a great idea.
.
hell a few months ago I had to teach you a "Teacher" that america was founded by liberal christian socialist and I am just a street smart guy from Chicago.
Well-known actually. Socialists of that time. The term was so vague didn't mean much. Definitely liberal and Christian. A lot of deists... The French enlightenment guys.So the GOP cutting of funding for University and training is a great idea then eh, brainwashed functional moron?Very trueAmen, and preach on Sis.
Our Constitution guarantees equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. But it's much easier to be a victim than to blame yourself for being lazy. And this is what the socialists play to.
But why did we sell out to Supply Side Economics
Cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government oversight all with the idea of a booming economy helping everyone
It never happened...the wealthy just kept the money increasing the wealth inequality
So why are we still doing it?
Let’s move our resources to helping working Americans with healthcare, education, retirement
Education?
You retarded liberals think 45% of American workers making minimum wage is a great idea.
.
hell a few months ago I had to teach you a "Teacher" that america was founded by liberal christian socialist and I am just a street smart guy from Chicago.
Did you come up with that all by yourself? Or was it a c&p from some left wing hack unionist blog?There Is No ‘Income Inequality’
Utter rubbish once again, just as with your claim that poverty didn't exist.
Not only does income inequality exist, it is a functional part of a capitalistic system! To claim otherwise is to blind yourself to a hundred reasons why one person moves "up the ladder" while another one with equal skills, experience and ability does not. There are so many gimmicks rigged into our system which rewards one person for playing within a corrupt system while excluding others because they either do not or cannot.
I won't even begin to try to list all the factors that go into whether you even get an interview, much less hired, promoted, offered an opportunity, equal or fair pay because the list is so long. Employers got you by the balls and you are either screwed over or get ahead via corruption, insider friends, or the like. Americans could very well be the most overworked and underpaid people in the 1st World.
I'll leave it to the reader to cogitate the problem and decide for themselves, but I would guess that less than 10% of ouyr population even finds work not only in something they WANT to do and like, but which is even a good utilization of their best talents!
Look, there is no such thing as income inequality because the notion of such presupposes the notion that income should be equal in the first place.
This ^ sentence concludes the discussion. One cannot argue with a fact.
Done
And I didn't say you said "take the damn hospitals" but rather that you said "nationalized healthcare" which - as you evidently don't know - means total gov't control, Comrade, not increased competition.So you didn't say "...to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals...?"And then everything will operate efficiently, in our best interests, and FREEEE!!!Maybe so but laws are not passed and taxes are not levied without the shitheads elected to government voting on it.
The legislators may very well be owned by the oligarchy. That is even a more compelling reason to have my more robust Bill of Rights protecting us from those that would oppress us and make slaves to the state of us.
We need three things to get this country in order.
1. A new Bill of Rights assuring personal Liberty and minimal government interference in our lives.
2. A real right to keep and bear arms that makes the government weenies fear the people.
3. The will to resist tyrannical government.
The Founding Fathers thoughts they had provided us with the first two but were unsure about the third. When asked what kind of government they gave us Ben Franklin answered "A Republic, if you can keep it".
When you look at this gloated Liberty robbing government we have now you know that we don't have the courage to protect our Liberty. If we did there would be a lot of tar and feathering going on.
None of that really seems functional to me. I am more practical. For instance, to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals, not giving insurance companies checks to keep perpetuating the same current payola.
I tell ya, there is nothing more naive than a big gov't leftard.
Nothing in my post said anything to indicate that private hospitals and insurance could not exist. There is nothing more greedy than a big gov't righttard who is too chickenshit scared about introducing competition into the marketplace.
I tell ya, there is nothing dimmer than a big gov't leftard.
I didn't say take the damn hospitals. There is no higher walled garden than medical in most places. Injecting competition into the market, including buying up hospitals, puts downward pressure on pricing and provides the government a vehicle to provide care for the poor and indigent more effectively. There are few companies that can run hospitals into the ground faster than for-profits like Lifepoint that specializes in acquiring hospitals in areas where there is zero competition.
A socialist society that didn't work? I'm shocked!!!Well-known actually. Socialists of that time. The term was so vague didn't mean much. Definitely liberal and Christian. A lot of deists... The French enlightenment guys.So the GOP cutting of funding for University and training is a great idea then eh, brainwashed functional moron?Very true
But why did we sell out to Supply Side Economics
Cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government oversight all with the idea of a booming economy helping everyone
It never happened...the wealthy just kept the money increasing the wealth inequality
So why are we still doing it?
Let’s move our resources to helping working Americans with healthcare, education, retirement
Education?
You retarded liberals think 45% of American workers making minimum wage is a great idea.
.
hell a few months ago I had to teach you a "Teacher" that america was founded by liberal christian socialist and I am just a street smart guy from Chicago.
Once again they founded a socialist colony in America and it DIDNT WORK
Gov't can't legislate good parenting. Americans have the right to be shitty people. WashDC can't impose the cultural changes necessary to break the cycle of poverty, and throwing more money confiscated from productive, middle class Americans won't solve the probs.You cited:1.As any observant individual has found, Liberals/Democrats think with their heart, not with their head. Soooo… an effective propaganda tool to win unthinking individuals over, is to simply point out that not everyone has the same income, wealth, material assets.
Boo hoo!
My usual perspective, is ‘so what’??? There is no real poverty, that is poverty in the Dickensian sense in America….you’ve never had to step over bodies in the gutter on your way to work….if another’s home is bigger or their car is newer, that is no one else’s business, and certainly not government’s.
2. But the always perceptive and articulate Bill O’Reilly has a somewhat different….and insightful….take on the issue of income inequality.
Getting right to the heart of the matter, O’Reilly nails it: any inequality in outcome, in terms of wealth, can be traced back to the real problem: parental inequality.
3. “Bad parenting, not capitalism, is the main cause of “income inequality” in America. The left, including liberal educators, media, and politicians will never admit that, but it’s absolutely true.
…begin with education. If a young child is not exposed to learning by age two, that innocent, helpless person is already at risk in a competitive society. If there are no books in the home, no awareness-building games, no fun dialogue with the parents, the child may not develop a curiosity about life.
As the child gets older, parents must participate in the learning process - emphasizing the tremendous importance of academic discipline and monitor school work on a daily basis.
Millions of American parents simply refuse to do that.” Bill O'Reilly: Bill's Weekly Column Archive
4. An example of how fiercely Liberals/Democrats fight this idea: Reading to your children is racist and unfair for all of the other minority children - leftist science.
“Professor: If You Read To Your Kids, You’re ‘Unfairly Disadvantaging’ Others According to a professor at the University of Warwick in England, parents who read to their kids should be thinking about how they’re “unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children” by doing so.
In an interview with ABC Radio last week, philosopher and professor Adam Swift said that since “bedtime stories activities . . . do indeed foster and produce . . . [desired] familial relationship goods,” he wouldn’t want to ban them, but that parents who “engage in bedtime-stories activities” should definitely at least feel kinda bad about it sometimes:
“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,” he said.”
Professor: If You Read To Your Kids, You’re ‘Unfairly Disadvantaging’ Others | National Review
What is the result of this sort of Leftist bilge, vis-à-vis the struggle to give every child the same start for success???
Next.
“Bad parenting, not capitalism, is the main cause of “income inequality” in America.
I agree there is a lot of trufh to that.
However, how do innocent children get “good parenting” if their parent(s) are poor, uneducated, abusive, and live in run down violent neighborhoods?
Maybe a government can help those poor children (or their children) become good parents eventually?
What socialist society in America are you talkin about you idiots? The kind of socialism Bernie Sanders and Warren and everybody else wants has not ever been a failure.A socialist society that didn't work? I'm shocked!!!Well-known actually. Socialists of that time. The term was so vague didn't mean much. Definitely liberal and Christian. A lot of deists... The French enlightenment guys.So the GOP cutting of funding for University and training is a great idea then eh, brainwashed functional moron?Education?
You retarded liberals think 45% of American workers making minimum wage is a great idea.
.
hell a few months ago I had to teach you a "Teacher" that america was founded by liberal christian socialist and I am just a street smart guy from Chicago.
Once again they founded a socialist colony in America and it DIDNT WORK
Wait ... no I'm not.
You haven't a clue what socialism is, what Sanders or Warren intend, and not a fucking clue what others want. All you know for certain is that you're a fucking IDIOT, you want "free" stuff, and you don't care who is made to pay for it or how much damage you do to this country.What socialist society in America are you talkin about you idiots? The kind of socialism Bernie Sanders and Warren and everybody else wants has not ever been a failure.A socialist society that didn't work? I'm shocked!!!Well-known actually. Socialists of that time. The term was so vague didn't mean much. Definitely liberal and Christian. A lot of deists... The French enlightenment guys.So the GOP cutting of funding for University and training is a great idea then eh, brainwashed functional moron?
hell a few months ago I had to teach you a "Teacher" that america was founded by liberal christian socialist and I am just a street smart guy from Chicago.
Once again they founded a socialist colony in America and it DIDNT WORK
Wait ... no I'm not.
The Democratic party solution is forcefully taking away money from people to give it to others.The fundamental problem with all democratic "solutions" is that they still preserve the economic structures that created the inequality to begin with. That is a fancy way of saying they ain't rocking Wall Street's boat.
And then everything will operate efficiently, in our best interests, and FREEEE!!!The majority doesn't decide. The oligarchy does.
Maybe so but laws are not passed and taxes are not levied without the shitheads elected to government voting on it.
The legislators may very well be owned by the oligarchy. That is even a more compelling reason to have my more robust Bill of Rights protecting us from those that would oppress us and make slaves to the state of us.
We need three things to get this country in order.
1. A new Bill of Rights assuring personal Liberty and minimal government interference in our lives.
2. A real right to keep and bear arms that makes the government weenies fear the people.
3. The will to resist tyrannical government.
The Founding Fathers thoughts they had provided us with the first two but were unsure about the third. When asked what kind of government they gave us Ben Franklin answered "A Republic, if you can keep it".
When you look at this gloated Liberty robbing government we have now you know that we don't have the courage to protect our Liberty. If we did there would be a lot of tar and feathering going on.
None of that really seems functional to me. I am more practical. For instance, to me nationalized healthcare means buying up the damn hospitals, not giving insurance companies checks to keep perpetuating the same current payola.
I tell ya, there is nothing more naive than a big gov't leftard.
Nothing in my post said anything to indicate that private hospitals and insurance could not exist. There is nothing more greedy than a big gov't righttard who is too chickenshit scared about introducing competition into the marketplace.
There is nothing more greedy than a big gov't righttard who is too chickenshit scared about introducing competition into the marketplace.
What competition do you want to introduce?
What socialist society in America are you talkin about you idiots? The kind of socialism Bernie Sanders and Warren and everybody else wants has not ever been a failure.A socialist society that didn't work? I'm shocked!!!Well-known actually. Socialists of that time. The term was so vague didn't mean much. Definitely liberal and Christian. A lot of deists... The French enlightenment guys.So the GOP cutting of funding for University and training is a great idea then eh, brainwashed functional moron?
hell a few months ago I had to teach you a "Teacher" that america was founded by liberal christian socialist and I am just a street smart guy from Chicago.
Once again they founded a socialist colony in America and it DIDNT WORK
Wait ... no I'm not.
You haven't a clue what socialism is, what Sanders or Warren intend, and not a fucking clue what others want. All you know for certain is that you're a fucking IDIOT, you want "free" stuff, and you don't care who is made to pay for it or how much damage you do to this country.What socialist society in America are you talkin about you idiots? The kind of socialism Bernie Sanders and Warren and everybody else wants has not ever been a failure.A socialist society that didn't work? I'm shocked!!!Well-known actually. Socialists of that time. The term was so vague didn't mean much. Definitely liberal and Christian. A lot of deists... The French enlightenment guys.hell a few months ago I had to teach you a "Teacher" that america was founded by liberal christian socialist and I am just a street smart guy from Chicago.
Once again they founded a socialist colony in America and it DIDNT WORK
Wait ... no I'm not.
Now STFU or go play with the other children on the coloring book forum, Comrade MORON.
