35 soul-crushing facts about American income inequality

[bedowin62]

the Left-wingers at SEIU/ACORN sued the state of Califonia for an exemption from paying THE MINIMUM WAGE TO THEIR OWN WORKERS

 

[bedowin62]

ACORN also tried to bully its own workers from joining unions; or from even organizing their own union!!

 

[Dot Com]

Yet, the right believes that Capitalism is what increases wealth for the People and not socialism.

It does increase wealth for the 1% which is who runs the republican party,who pays for the republican party to exist so the republican party members can make sure the fed gov stays off their backs to pay a fair share of taxes,pay livable wages,and to keep jobs here. Granted the fed gov isn't doing a very good job of any of those either but its better to have them do SOMETHING than allow the 1% free reign over things.

Yes. That is who the Repubs work for. Their Base are merely useful idiots

http://i.imgur.com/wXWvhDR.jpg

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yet, the right believes that Capitalism is what increases wealth for the People and not socialism.

I'm sure you'll fare far better in Venezuela, dumbshit. There is a flight leaving Thursday - go find your fortune,,,

 

[Dot Com]

 

[bedowin62]

i'm thinking dot com is Greek in more ways than one

 

[Two Thumbs]

The 1930's are you serious? Who is harassing the "least wealthy"?

Giving people opportunities is what capitalism offers, socialism try's to float the myth that everyone will be treated the same...

Great fantasy but no where close to reality...

Don't believe in the Socialism of equality before the law; I got it, Person on the clueless and Causeless Right.

You don't want equality, that's not what you are demanding, you are demanding unequal taxation.

that's why you are a blithering idiot, you have no idea of what you are demanding.

and really, socialism is great, on paper, in reality it sucks, but you're a leftist and can't learn from reality.

Nothing but appeals to ignorance as that form of laziness in argumentation; why ask the least wealthy to work harder than you.

I believe in equality in the law; the law says economic discrimination is both legal and socially acceptable under Any form of Capitalism.

Really?

Plz link the law that says that or stfu and get off the crack.

You mean it is not a self-evident truth?

Economic discrimination is discrimination based on economic factors. These factors can include job availability, wages, the prices and/or availability of goods and services, and the amount of capital investment funding available to minorities for business. This can include discrimination against workers, consumers, and minority-owned businesses.--Source: Economic discrimination - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I asked for a

link to a
LAW

not some sissified bunch of whinny bitches version of reality.

move along junior, you don't have enough years out of mommies basement to keep this up

 

[danielpalos]

Don't believe in the Socialism of equality before the law; I got it, Person on the clueless and Causeless Right.

You don't want equality, that's not what you are demanding, you are demanding unequal taxation.

that's why you are a blithering idiot, you have no idea of what you are demanding.

and really, socialism is great, on paper, in reality it sucks, but you're a leftist and can't learn from reality.

Nothing but appeals to ignorance as that form of laziness in argumentation; why ask the least wealthy to work harder than you.

I believe in equality in the law; the law says economic discrimination is both legal and socially acceptable under Any form of Capitalism.

Really?

Plz link the law that says that or stfu and get off the crack.

You mean it is not a self-evident truth?

Economic discrimination is discrimination based on economic factors. These factors can include job availability, wages, the prices and/or availability of goods and services, and the amount of capital investment funding available to minorities for business. This can include discrimination against workers, consumers, and minority-owned businesses.--Source: Economic discrimination - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I asked for a

link to a
LAW

not some sissified bunch of whinny bitches version of reality.

move along junior, you don't have enough years out of mommies basement to keep this up

No logic and reason; how lazy of you.

Here you go; It merely supports my contention that poverty is institutional, not Individual.

A recognition of economic discrimination began in the British Railway Clauses Consolidation Act of 1845, which prohibited a common carrier from charging one person more for carrying freight than was charged to another customer for the same service. In nineteenth-century English and American common law, discrimination was characterized as improper distinctions in economic transactions; in addition to the above issue in the British Railway Clauses, a hotelier capriciously refusing to give rooms to a particular patron would constitute economic discrimination. These early laws were designed to protect discrimination from Protestants who might discriminate against Catholics or Christians who might discriminate against Jews.

By the early twentieth century, economic discrimination was broadened to include biased or unequal terms against other companies or competing companies. The Robinson-Patman Act (1936), which prevents sellers of commodities in interstate commerce from discriminating in price between purchasers of goods of like grade and quality, was designed to prevent vertically integrated trusts from driving smaller competitors out of the market through economies of scale.

It was not until 1941, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an executive order forbidding discrimination in employment by a company working under a government defense contract, that economic discrimination took on the overtones it has today, which is discrimination against minorities. By 1960, anti-trust laws and interstate commerce laws had effectively regulated inter-corporate discrimination so problematic in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but the problem of discrimination on an economic basis against minorities had become widespread.

....

Source: Economic discrimination - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[GWV5903]

You don't want equality, that's not what you are demanding, you are demanding unequal taxation.

that's why you are a blithering idiot, you have no idea of what you are demanding.

and really, socialism is great, on paper, in reality it sucks, but you're a leftist and can't learn from reality.

Nothing but appeals to ignorance as that form of laziness in argumentation; why ask the least wealthy to work harder than you.

I believe in equality in the law; the law says economic discrimination is both legal and socially acceptable under Any form of Capitalism.

Really?

Plz link the law that says that or stfu and get off the crack.

You mean it is not a self-evident truth?

Economic discrimination is discrimination based on economic factors. These factors can include job availability, wages, the prices and/or availability of goods and services, and the amount of capital investment funding available to minorities for business. This can include discrimination against workers, consumers, and minority-owned businesses.--Source: Economic discrimination - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I asked for a

link to a
LAW

not some sissified bunch of whinny bitches version of reality.

move along junior, you don't have enough years out of mommies basement to keep this up

No logic and reason; how lazy of you.

Here you go; It merely supports my contention that poverty is institutional, not Individual.

A recognition of economic discrimination began in the British Railway Clauses Consolidation Act of 1845, which prohibited a common carrier from charging one person more for carrying freight than was charged to another customer for the same service. In nineteenth-century English and American common law, discrimination was characterized as improper distinctions in economic transactions; in addition to the above issue in the British Railway Clauses, a hotelier capriciously refusing to give rooms to a particular patron would constitute economic discrimination. These early laws were designed to protect discrimination from Protestants who might discriminate against Catholics or Christians who might discriminate against Jews.

By the early twentieth century, economic discrimination was broadened to include biased or unequal terms against other companies or competing companies. The Robinson-Patman Act (1936), which prevents sellers of commodities in interstate commerce from discriminating in price between purchasers of goods of like grade and quality, was designed to prevent vertically integrated trusts from driving smaller competitors out of the market through economies of scale.

It was not until 1941, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an executive order forbidding discrimination in employment by a company working under a government defense contract, that economic discrimination took on the overtones it has today, which is discrimination against minorities. By 1960, anti-trust laws and interstate commerce laws had effectively regulated inter-corporate discrimination so problematic in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but the problem of discrimination on an economic basis against minorities had become widespread.

....

Source: Economic discrimination - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

This is it?

Your grand answer to the ills of capitalism?

You are the #1 contender to take Deany's place here at USMB, your mother must be proud!

 

[kaz]

35 soul-crushing facts about American income inequality - Salon.com

Interesting and disturbing.

What is? I don't understand why zero content threads like this aren't just automatically junked and the OP warned for spamming. What about putting some content in your post rather than just a link and a whine?

 

[danielpalos]

Yet, the right believes that Capitalism is what increases wealth for the People and not socialism.

I'm sure you'll fare far better in Venezuela, dumbshit. There is a flight leaving Thursday - go find your fortune,,,

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

 

[bedowin62]

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

simply incredibly stupid. what is this "social contract"? and if "the rest is just bad management" you'd think they'd have that part figured out by now.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

simply incredibly stupid. what is this "social contract"? and if "the rest is just bad management" you'd think they'd have that part figured out by now.

I do. You are the one who is clueless and Causeless and have poor reading comprehension. Our federal and State Constitutions are Social Contracts.

 

[bedowin62]

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

simply incredibly stupid. what is this "social contract"? and if "the rest is just bad management" you'd think they'd have that part figured out by now.

I do. You are the one who is clueless and Causeless and have poor reading comprehension. Our federal and State Constitutions are Social Contracts.

you said Socialism starts with a social contract dullard. explain that

 

[danielpalos]

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

simply incredibly stupid. what is this "social contract"? and if "the rest is just bad management" you'd think they'd have that part figured out by now.

I do. You are the one who is clueless and Causeless and have poor reading comprehension. Our federal and State Constitutions are Social Contracts.

you said Socialism starts with a social contract dullard. explain that

Only the clueless and Causeless say that; everyone else knows socialism starts with a social contract. It is why I am so glad our Founding Fathers did such an Most Excellent job with ours.

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

simply incredibly stupid. what is this "social contract"? and if "the rest is just bad management" you'd think they'd have that part figured out by now.

I do. You are the one who is clueless and Causeless and have poor reading comprehension. Our federal and State Constitutions are Social Contracts.

you said Socialism starts with a social contract dullard. explain that

Sure, here it is for the clueless and the Causeless; a social contract establishes Government. It really is that simple, except to the Right.

 

[bedowin62]

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

simply incredibly stupid. what is this "social contract"? and if "the rest is just bad management" you'd think they'd have that part figured out by now.

I do. You are the one who is clueless and Causeless and have poor reading comprehension. Our federal and State Constitutions are Social Contracts.

you said Socialism starts with a social contract dullard. explain that

It's sad that you failed to complete a primary education.

A social contract extends beyond a Constitution. It is also noteworthy that a social contract need not follow the model of Hobbes that you support, that of absolute totalitarianism - though Socialism and Communism must follow that path. Locke demonstrated that the natural rights of men supersede the social contract and that the purpose of a civil society is to promote natural rights, not to crush them as you socialists seek to do.

I believe it is even sadder that you may have graduated from even tertiary education. Do they actually teach, begging the question.

Your point being? Socialism begins with a Social Contract; that is the Only point I am trying to make regarding socialism; the rest is simply bad management.

simply incredibly stupid. what is this "social contract"? and if "the rest is just bad management" you'd think they'd have that part figured out by now.

I do. You are the one who is clueless and Causeless and have poor reading comprehension. Our federal and State Constitutions are Social Contracts.

you said Socialism starts with a social contract dullard. explain that

Sure, here it is for the clueless and the Causeless; a social contract establishes Government. It really is that simple, except to the Right.

simple and irrelevant

thanks for nothing leftard

 

[bedowin62]

Ladies and Gentlemen;


here he is danielpalos; transmitting from the evil capital of world imperialism and capitalism; whining about it, for your viewing pleasure!!


lol what a fruitloop

 

[danielpalos]

Just the clueless and the Causeless too lazy to acquire and possess them; but, hey, why not blame the least wealthy for being lazy.