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.
The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply with the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
I said they would love to sell more bread, not just bake more bread. Capitalism works so you are spouting nonsense. Government involvement in business is how business becomes corrupt. Then it's crony capitalism, not free market capitalism.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
They are not ordered to give the bread away, just to make enough bread. That they have to be ordered is just another poof for that the market must be regulated.I said they would love to sell more bread, not just bake more bread. Capitalism works so you are spouting nonsense. Government involvement in business is how business becomes corrupt. Then it's crony capitalism, not free market capitalism.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
You know, the ones that lead in murders and have school systems that refuse to educate kids. Baltimore, Detroit, NY, and other similar shit holes.You mean the ones who pay for repub states existence?Not that I ever believe these BS rankings, but I wonder how high we would have ranked if they excluded liberal utopian cities that are massive failures.America in deep sheet Thank you RepublicansNot what the federal government wants for Americans.
Obamacare is what the federal government wants for Americans... so much for any sort of freedom and individuality. Let's hope that changes soon... lol
America Is Now a ‘Second Tier’ Country
Some 17 others, including all of Scandinavia, outperform the U.S. by a wide margin when it comes to well-being.
By
Eric Roston
June 21, 2017, 4:45 AM EDT
Visitors to Yosemite Valley view clouds forming along the granite ridges after a rain storm in California’s Yosemite National Park.
Photographer: Eric Paul Zamora/Fresno Bee/TNS via Getty Images
America leads the world when it comes to access to higher education. But when it comes to health, environmental protection, and fighting discrimination, it trails many other developed countries, according to the Social Progress Imperative, a U.S.-based nonprofit.
The results of the group’s annual survey, which ranks nations based on 50 metrics, call to mind other reviews of national well-being, such as the World Happiness Report released in March, which was led by Norway, Denmark, and Iceland, or September’s Lancet study on sustainable development. In that one, Iceland, Singapore, Sweden, and the U.S. took spots 1, 2, 3, and 28—respectively.
The Social Progress Index released this week is compiled from social and environmental data that come as close as possible to revealing how people live. “We want to measure a country’s health and wellness achieved, not how much effort is expended, nor how much the country spends on healthcare,” the report states. Scandinavia walked away with the top four of 128 slots. Denmark scored the highest. America came in at 18.
Your story makes no sense. There's definitely more to it. The people are broke, what do they buy the bread with?They are not ordered to give the bread away, just to make enough bread. That they have to be ordered is just another poof for that the market must be regulated.I said they would love to sell more bread, not just bake more bread. Capitalism works so you are spouting nonsense. Government involvement in business is how business becomes corrupt. Then it's crony capitalism, not free market capitalism.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
Your story makes no sense. There's definitely more to it. The people are broke, what do they buy the bread with?They are not ordered to give the bread away, just to make enough bread. That they have to be ordered is just another poof for that the market must be regulated.I said they would love to sell more bread, not just bake more bread. Capitalism works so you are spouting nonsense. Government involvement in business is how business becomes corrupt. Then it's crony capitalism, not free market capitalism.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
The US is not a jungle due to strong property rights and the Second Amendment. Venezuela became a banana republic (again) due to the Socialists. This is indisputably true.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.it works best when blended in with some socialism....Capitalism doesn´t work. Over time, it accumulates all the money into a single hand. Therefore the government is required to regulate the free market. If it doesn´t, the system will crash due to a lack of purchasing power.This is true, but you don't do it with handouts. The government will never make life better, That's the job of capitalism.Those socialist countries are living off other peoples money… Sooner or later it will dry upWhen you make life better for the poor you make life better for allThose socialist countries are living off other peoples money… Sooner or later it will dry up
That's why Socialism has never worked long term in the history of the planet… It brings out the worst in people
The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.it works best when blended in with some socialism....Capitalism doesn´t work. Over time, it accumulates all the money into a single hand. Therefore the government is required to regulate the free market. If it doesn´t, the system will crash due to a lack of purchasing power.This is true, but you don't do it with handouts. The government will never make life better, That's the job of capitalism.Those socialist countries are living off other peoples money… Sooner or later it will dry upWhen you make life better for the poor you make life better for allThose socialist countries are living off other peoples money… Sooner or later it will dry up
That's why Socialism has never worked long term in the history of the planet… It brings out the worst in people
Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
The people are not broke. The prices are manipulated. Sure, the low oil prices hit the country hard but it is recovering. What really is a problem is the US-backed opposition´s criminal actions.Your story makes no sense. There's definitely more to it. The people are broke, what do they buy the bread with?They are not ordered to give the bread away, just to make enough bread. That they have to be ordered is just another poof for that the market must be regulated.I said they would love to sell more bread, not just bake more bread. Capitalism works so you are spouting nonsense. Government involvement in business is how business becomes corrupt. Then it's crony capitalism, not free market capitalism.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
Yes it is a jungle and banana republic and this is why you need a gun. Not everywhere of course but it doesn´t look like its improving although the police work has improved in the past 20 years. You have lawless areas, wastelands that I would not visit in a tank. Deal with it before you point out any criticism towards other countries.Your story makes no sense. There's definitely more to it. The people are broke, what do they buy the bread with?They are not ordered to give the bread away, just to make enough bread. That they have to be ordered is just another poof for that the market must be regulated.I said they would love to sell more bread, not just bake more bread. Capitalism works so you are spouting nonsense. Government involvement in business is how business becomes corrupt. Then it's crony capitalism, not free market capitalism.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.The US is not a jungle due to strong property rights and the Second Amendment. Venezuela became a banana republic (again) due to the Socialists. This is indisputably true.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.it works best when blended in with some socialism....Capitalism doesn´t work. Over time, it accumulates all the money into a single hand. Therefore the government is required to regulate the free market. If it doesn´t, the system will crash due to a lack of purchasing power.This is true, but you don't do it with handouts. The government will never make life better, That's the job of capitalism.When you make life better for the poor you make life better for all
That's why Socialism has never worked long term in the history of the planet… It brings out the worst in people
Your welfare system is underdeveloped and we read in the news how many homeless are going to die next winter. You have thousands of skyscrapers, who don´t you have homes for the poor?The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.it works best when blended in with some socialism....Capitalism doesn´t work. Over time, it accumulates all the money into a single hand. Therefore the government is required to regulate the free market. If it doesn´t, the system will crash due to a lack of purchasing power.This is true, but you don't do it with handouts. The government will never make life better, That's the job of capitalism.When you make life better for the poor you make life better for all
That's why Socialism has never worked long term in the history of the planet… It brings out the worst in people
just about all human societies have systems of social support in place. The USA did not invent the idea
Syria´s problems are due to the war. But they do their best to distribute food and medicine and that is what counts.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.The crisis is Venezuela is political, not economic. Either the companies comply to the democratically legitimated development or the government has to take over control. You can see the "badcaps" ranting on the board because they want expensive luxury pastries to be sold to the upper class while the rest of the people lacks of bread. It means the government ordered the bakeries to make a specific percentage of bread, not that the government takes over. If the bakeries refuse to comply, the government takes over. That has not even to do anything with capitalism vs socialism, any government is tasked with caring about the food supply. It has to do with parts of the economy boycotting the entire country to enforce their feudalism.The words are still in existence because they still mean the same thing. Private ownership vs. public. If you keep taking from the private sector capitalism can't support the economy then the state starts taking over control. That's what happens in socialist countries. Venezuela should serve as an example of how that ends up.The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
People lack food "BECAUSE OF CAPITALISM" ? I am delighted that no one is starving in
Syria because Syria has a NATIONAL SOCIALIST ECONOMY
Sorry but I don't believe a fucking thing in that anti-American op-ed.The people are not broke. The prices are manipulated. Sure, the low oil prices hit the country hard but it is recovering. What really is a problem is the US-backed opposition´s criminal actions.Your story makes no sense. There's definitely more to it. The people are broke, what do they buy the bread with?They are not ordered to give the bread away, just to make enough bread. That they have to be ordered is just another poof for that the market must be regulated.I said they would love to sell more bread, not just bake more bread. Capitalism works so you are spouting nonsense. Government involvement in business is how business becomes corrupt. Then it's crony capitalism, not free market capitalism.Didn´t you read? The private bakeries refused to make bread and the government ordered them to make bread.The rest of the people lack bread due to socialism. I'm sure bakers would love to sell more. Tasking the people with bread supplies is what happened in the USSR too. The more involved government gets, including business, the worse it gets.
"because of socialism" is the most featureless claim that you can make.
Millions, billions in the world lack of food because of capitalism and you ignore it.
"Disgruntled customers, empty store shelves, long supermarket lines. These are the images that mainstream U.S. media typically feature in their coverage of Venezuela’s ongoing food crisis.
U.S. media outlets publish stories blaming Venezuela’s food crisis on the socialist government almost daily. Today isn’t any different.These images are usually accompanied by sarcastic headlines like Forbes’ “Venezuela Discovers the Perfect Weight Loss Diet” and the Cato Institute’s “Hunger Is in Retreat, But Not in Socialist Venezuela.”
A new study released by researchers from three Venezuelan universities reported that nearly 75 percent of the population lost an average of 19 pounds in 2016 for lack of food. The report, titled, “2016 Living Conditions Survey,” added that about 32.5 percent of Venezuelans eat only once or twice a day, compared to 11.3 percent last year.
Moreover, 93.3 percent told the researchers that their income was not enough to cover their food needs.
The facts are clear — Venezuela does have a food crisis. Mainstream U.S. media, however, blames the socialist government that has radically improved the country’s standard of living instead of right-wing U.S.-backed opposition forces intentionally sabotaging the economy.
Since the early 2000s, supermarket owners affiliated with Venezuela’s opposition have been purposefully hoarding food products so they can resell them at higher prices and make large profits. Food importing companies owned by the country’s wealthy right-wing elite are also manipulating import figures to raise prices.
In 2013, former Venezuelan Central Bank chief Edmee Betancourt reported that the country lost between US$15 and $20 billion dollars the previous year through such fraudulent import deals.
It doesn’t stop there.
Last year, over 750 opposition-controlled offshore companies linked to the Panama Papers scandal were accused of purposely redirecting Venezuelan imports of raw food materials from the government to the private sector. Many of these companies sell their products to private companies in Colombia, which resell them to Venezuelans living close to Colombia.
Reuters admitted in 2014 that Venezuelan opposition members living in border states are shipping low-cost foodstuffs provided by the Venezuelan government into Colombia for profit.“Selling contraband is a serious problem. People here are taking large quantities of products meant for Venezuelans and selling them in Colombia,” Valencia resident Francisco Luzon told Al Jazeera in a 2014 interview.
Overall, Venezuela’s millionaire opposition are profiting handsomely from the country’s food crisis while blaming it on the socialist government that’s trying to eliminate it."
Blaming Socialism, US Media Distorts Venezuela’s Food Crisis
The skyscrapers are privately owned. If they want to let bums live there for free they can. If they don't want to they don't have to. Our welfare system is a HUGE chunk of domestic spending. Your brain is what's underdeveloped.Your welfare system is underdeveloped and we read in the news how many homeless are going to die next winter. You have thousands of skyscrapers, who don´t you have homes for the poor?The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.it works best when blended in with some socialism....Capitalism doesn´t work. Over time, it accumulates all the money into a single hand. Therefore the government is required to regulate the free market. If it doesn´t, the system will crash due to a lack of purchasing power.This is true, but you don't do it with handouts. The government will never make life better, That's the job of capitalism.
That's why Socialism has never worked long term in the history of the planet… It brings out the worst in people
just about all human societies have systems of social support in place. The USA did not invent the idea
Your welfare system is underdeveloped and we read in the news how many homeless are going to die next winter. You have thousands of skyscrapers, who don´t you have homes for the poor?The terms capitalism and socialism are outdated. A civilized society differs from the jungle because those in need get help. Those opposing any welfare are going to the welfare office in case of unemployment, too. Then they will see the benefits of a welfare system.it works best when blended in with some socialism....Capitalism doesn´t work. Over time, it accumulates all the money into a single hand. Therefore the government is required to regulate the free market. If it doesn´t, the system will crash due to a lack of purchasing power.This is true, but you don't do it with handouts. The government will never make life better, That's the job of capitalism.
That's why Socialism has never worked long term in the history of the planet… It brings out the worst in people
just about all human societies have systems of social support in place. The USA did not invent the idea
