Capitalism cures Poverty

[anotherlife]

This yarn brook lies a bit in a few places quite badly. Very interesting video though.

Some of his lies in this video are the following.
There is no wage negotiation in Asia. Bull.
We want them to earn $4 in place of $2. Bull.
They starve if we don't buy them. Double bull.
Slavery. Bull. Capitalism made slaves twice as cheap as in the confederate south 200 years ago.
And the biggest bull is that capitalism only is what eliminates poverty. More poverty was eliminated in early medieval Europe when slaves were converted into serfs.

Capitalism creates slaves. They have their wages as per dollar exchange rate manipulation. And brook is a cheap propaganda pusher to say that they would starve otherwise, because nothing can get around the Malthusian law.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gee there is NO poverty in Capitalistic America.

We followed the Progressive recipe, just give poor people money for staying poor -- and they tend to stay poor

This goes beyond his usual idiot-gram, into the realm of total ignorance.

Please explain how paying people to stay poor breaks the cycle of poverty.

Why should I edify you, your ignorance is total and you will remain willfully ignorant?

Look up TANF, then see how your state implemented welfare reform.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gee there is NO poverty in Capitalistic America.

We followed the Progressive recipe, just give poor people money for staying poor -- and they tend to stay poor

This goes beyond his usual idiot-gram, into the realm of total ignorance.

Please explain how paying people to stay poor breaks the cycle of poverty.

Why should I edify you, your ignorance is total and you will remain willfully ignorant?

Look up TANF, then see how your state implemented welfare reform.

Unregulated capitalism may cure some in poverty, and elevate them into the working poor. Exploitation makes the ownership and managerial classes wealthy, at the expense of labor. Today we see:

• A war on the minimum wage
• A war on unemployment insurance
• A war on OT
• A war on labor unions
• A war on benefits
• A war on earned benefits and retirements promised and reneged.

• A war on the minimum wage -- Still in tact. When did this happen?
• A war on unemployment insurance -- Together with Food Stamps, Unemployment is supposedly one of the big engines powering the Obama economy
• A war on OT -- Where? When?
• A war on labor unions -- They're killing themselves with unsustainable cost structure
• A war on benefits -- Where? When?
• A war on earned benefits and retirements promised and reneged. -- You mean Social Security?

Federal refusal to raise the minimum wage;
UI was not extended during the Great Bush Recession
Efforts to convert OT to comp time
Bullshit, labor unions negotiate with management - I know I've done it
Benefits have been cut by state and local governments. Industry and corporations call it "right to work".
Yep, I mean SS and other earned entitlements.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This yarn brook lies a bit in a few places quite badly. Very interesting video though.

Some of his lies in this video are the following.
There is no wage negotiation in Asia. Bull.
We want them to earn $4 in place of $2. Bull.
They starve if we don't buy them. Double bull.
Slavery. Bull. Capitalism made slaves twice as cheap as in the confederate south 200 years ago.
And the biggest bull is that capitalism only is what eliminates poverty. More poverty was eliminated in early medieval Europe when slaves were converted into serfs.

Capitalism creates slaves. The have their wages as per dollar exchange rate manipulation. And brook is a cheap propaganda pusher to say that they would starve otherwise, because nothing can get around the Malthusian law.

So we can eliminate poverty by converting all wage earners (slaves) into serfs?

 

[Wry Catcher]

This yarn brook lies a bit in a few places quite badly. Very interesting video though.

Some of his lies in this video are the following.
There is no wage negotiation in Asia. Bull.
We want them to earn $4 in place of $2. Bull.
They starve if we don't buy them. Double bull.
Slavery. Bull. Capitalism made slaves twice as cheap as in the confederate south 200 years ago.
And the biggest bull is that capitalism only is what eliminates poverty. More poverty was eliminated in early medieval Europe when slaves were converted into serfs.

Capitalism creates slaves. The have their wages as per dollar exchange rate manipulation. And brook is a cheap propaganda pusher to say that they would starve otherwise, because nothing can get around the Malthusian law.

So we can eliminate poverty by converting all wage earners (slaves) into serfs?

By deciding what others' mean and mocking them is in your mind a rebuttal? ^^^ an Idiot-gram on steroids.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

While I tend to agree with the professor in the OP video it raises the question of...

Why I should pay any more than $2 an hour to someone in this country if they can't even handle a simple cleaning job and/or can barely flip a burger without assistanceand/or supervision, and have little to no education because they choose not to receive one?

If they have no useful skills other than those they might be better off working in agriculture by picking the crops for the farmers who raise them and be happy with living like the Chinese do in those agricultural areas.

*****SMILE*****

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Yaron Brook explains how capitalism cures poverty.

How?

Did you watch the video?

.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[ScienceRocks]

Capitalism is important part of curing poverty...There's no question about.

The problems start when a few people at the top percentages start to hog everything and aim to destroy all others that wish to compete. This is why we have anti-trust and regulations to promote fairness and a capitalism that works for all.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Gee there is NO poverty in Capitalistic America.

We followed the Progressive recipe, just give poor people money for staying poor -- and they tend to stay poor

This goes beyond his usual idiot-gram, into the realm of total ignorance.

Please explain how paying people to stay poor breaks the cycle of poverty.

He made good points. Why did you ask what he had already answered?

I would like to read YOUR beliefs. Beyond "let the stave" in the street, I mean.


.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[task0778]

Capitalism is an economic model that is unsurpassed at curing poverty IF it is effectively regulated by good, responsible governance. No other economic system even comes close to providing the benefits to everybody that capitalism does. Is it perfect? NO. Why? Cuz people run it and human nature requires careful but constant monitoring. All this bitching about capitalism is woefully misplaced, what everyone should be bitching about is the piss poor governance we've had in this country for a very long time.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Gee there is NO poverty in Capitalistic America.

We followed the Progressive recipe, just give poor people money for staying poor -- and they tend to stay poor

This goes beyond his usual idiot-gram, into the realm of total ignorance.

Please explain how paying people to stay poor breaks the cycle of poverty.

He made good points. Why did you ask what he had already answered?

I would like to read YOUR beliefs. Beyond "let the stave" in the street, I mean.


.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Look at North Korea and South Korea; one went capitalist, the other opted for the Progressive Utopia of State control; which worked?

Look at the US "War on Poverty" I believe that the War on Poverty has only helped Progressives and has been a complete, unmitigated disaster for the ones they intended to "serve". Progressives have successfully created inter-generational, government dependents who MUST vote Democrat for their very sustenance.

 

[Moonglow]

To date there is absolutely no other economic model that approaches the positive benefits that capitalism has provided over the past 200+ years. Not even close. To be sure, capitalism requires good governance to control it's excesses, because that is true of socialism or any other economic model because guess what, they are all run by people. Same as any form of government model, people can be corrupted, so whatever excesses capitalism is guilty of that are not being adequately addressed are pretty much the fault of inadequate government. And whose fault is that? OURS, for not throwing the bastards out.

Well, the industrial revolution helped more than what you call capitalism that was one mercantilism.

 

[anotherlife]

Capitalism is an economic model that is unsurpassed at curing poverty IF it is effectively regulated by good, responsible governance. No other economic system even comes close to providing the benefits to everybody that capitalism does. Is it perfect? NO. Why? Cuz people run it and human nature requires careful but constant monitoring. All this bitching about capitalism is woefully misplaced, what everyone should be bitching about is the piss poor governance we've had in this country for a very long time.

Capitalism is a word that was invented by the communist, to loosely label the non-communist. Therefore, to use the definition of capitalism, you first have to use the definition of communism. As per the word capitalist, you first have to be a communist, to understand it.

 

[anotherlife]

Gee there is NO poverty in Capitalistic America.

We followed the Progressive recipe, just give poor people money for staying poor -- and they tend to stay poor

This goes beyond his usual idiot-gram, into the realm of total ignorance.

Please explain how paying people to stay poor breaks the cycle of poverty.

He made good points. Why did you ask what he had already answered?

I would like to read YOUR beliefs. Beyond "let the stave" in the street, I mean.


.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Look at North Korea and South Korea; one went capitalist, the other opted for the Progressive Utopia of State control; which worked?

Look at the US "War on Poverty" I believe that the War on Poverty has only helped Progressives and has been a complete, unmitigated disaster for the ones they intended to "serve". Progressives have successfully created inter-generational, government dependents who MUST vote Democrat for their very sustenance.

Both Koreans have gigantic problems, only very different types. The North Koreans are hungry. The South Koreans are in fear of Chinese competition, so they work 24/7 and have no time to eat and buy food.

 

[anotherlife]

This yarn brook lies a bit in a few places quite badly. Very interesting video though.

Some of his lies in this video are the following.
There is no wage negotiation in Asia. Bull.
We want them to earn $4 in place of $2. Bull.
They starve if we don't buy them. Double bull.
Slavery. Bull. Capitalism made slaves twice as cheap as in the confederate south 200 years ago.
And the biggest bull is that capitalism only is what eliminates poverty. More poverty was eliminated in early medieval Europe when slaves were converted into serfs.

Capitalism creates slaves. The have their wages as per dollar exchange rate manipulation. And brook is a cheap propaganda pusher to say that they would starve otherwise, because nothing can get around the Malthusian law.

So we can eliminate poverty by converting all wage earners (slaves) into serfs?

By deciding what others' mean and mocking them is in your mind a rebuttal? ^^^ an Idiot-gram on steroids.

I think it is interesting, that serfs had very little to do during the winter months. Capitalist workers work 60 hour weeks all year around, like slaves. How would you like a 3 month paid vacation every year like a serf?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We followed the Progressive recipe, just give poor people money for staying poor -- and they tend to stay poor

This goes beyond his usual idiot-gram, into the realm of total ignorance.

Please explain how paying people to stay poor breaks the cycle of poverty.

He made good points. Why did you ask what he had already answered?

I would like to read YOUR beliefs. Beyond "let the stave" in the street, I mean.


.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Look at North Korea and South Korea; one went capitalist, the other opted for the Progressive Utopia of State control; which worked?

Look at the US "War on Poverty" I believe that the War on Poverty has only helped Progressives and has been a complete, unmitigated disaster for the ones they intended to "serve". Progressives have successfully created inter-generational, government dependents who MUST vote Democrat for their very sustenance.

Both Koreans have gigantic problems, only very different types. The North Koreans are hungry. The South Koreans are in fear of Chinese competition, so they work 24/7 and have no time to eat and buy food.

OK. Whatever. Eating dirt is just like working overtime, I can't argue your logic

 

[task0778]

To date there is absolutely no other economic model that approaches the positive benefits that capitalism has provided over the past 200+ years. Not even close. To be sure, capitalism requires good governance to control it's excesses, because that is true of socialism or any other economic model because guess what, they are all run by people. Same as any form of government model, people can be corrupted, so whatever excesses capitalism is guilty of that are not being adequately addressed are pretty much the fault of inadequate government. And whose fault is that? OURS, for not throwing the bastards out.

Well, the industrial revolution helped more than what you call capitalism that was one mercantilism.

Capitalism pre-dates the industrial revolution by a couple of centuries; the IR took place under the capitalistic economic model.

 

[task0778]

Capitalism is an economic model that is unsurpassed at curing poverty IF it is effectively regulated by good, responsible governance. No other economic system even comes close to providing the benefits to everybody that capitalism does. Is it perfect? NO. Why? Cuz people run it and human nature requires careful but constant monitoring. All this bitching about capitalism is woefully misplaced, what everyone should be bitching about is the piss poor governance we've had in this country for a very long time.

Capitalism is a word that was invented by the communist, to loosely label the non-communist. Therefore, to use the definition of capitalism, you first have to use the definition of communism. As per the word capitalist, you first have to be a communist, to understand it.

This post is total nonsense. You have to be a communist to understand capitalism? Bullshit.

 

[anotherlife]

Capitalism is an economic model that is unsurpassed at curing poverty IF it is effectively regulated by good, responsible governance. No other economic system even comes close to providing the benefits to everybody that capitalism does. Is it perfect? NO. Why? Cuz people run it and human nature requires careful but constant monitoring. All this bitching about capitalism is woefully misplaced, what everyone should be bitching about is the piss poor governance we've had in this country for a very long time.

Capitalism is a word that was invented by the communist, to loosely label the non-communist. Therefore, to use the definition of capitalism, you first have to use the definition of communism. As per the word capitalist, you first have to be a communist, to understand it.

This post is total nonsense. You have to be a communist to understand capitalism? Bullshit.

What do you call capitalism then?

 

[anotherlife]

To date there is absolutely no other economic model that approaches the positive benefits that capitalism has provided over the past 200+ years. Not even close. To be sure, capitalism requires good governance to control it's excesses, because that is true of socialism or any other economic model because guess what, they are all run by people. Same as any form of government model, people can be corrupted, so whatever excesses capitalism is guilty of that are not being adequately addressed are pretty much the fault of inadequate government. And whose fault is that? OURS, for not throwing the bastards out.

Well, the industrial revolution helped more than what you call capitalism that was one mercantilism.

Capitalism pre-dates the industrial revolution by a couple of centuries; the IR took place under the capitalistic economic model.

No, the stock exchange is a consequence of public enterprising, not a precondition. By the way, King George I caused the first real stock bubble, when he sold the English national debt to the south sea company.