Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, which people are those?
The imaginatary cardboard cutouts of liberals that you think are hiding under everybody's beds or something?
Honestly creating strawmen to complain about is pretty lame, amigo.
I'm talking about your delusions regarding what liberals want, not about the middle class.
Do try to stay on subject.
Yes, people who work hard and create SHOULD get rich.
We're eating our children, folks.
Fuck the moral standpoint, what about the argument of taking care of the poor so that they don't commit violent crimes against the upper classes? When one's survival depends on it, those in need will take from those that have something.
Fuck the moral standpoint, what about the argument of taking care of the poor so that they don't commit violent crimes against the upper classes? When one's survival depends on it, those in need will take from those that have something.
Fuck the moral standpoint, what about the argument of taking care of the poor so that they don't commit violent crimes against the upper classes? When one's survival depends on it, those in need will take from those that have something.
Ahh... so you are in to paying 'protection money'
Anyone who can't see the problem with extreme income inequality is extremely short-sighted, and has no understanding of history. In fact, one of the very things that allowed the United States to emerge as it did was BECAUSE it was at least a relatively more equal society than most others at the time of it's beginnings, and that's true for several societies that have become relatively "successful" in the modern world, and the reasons for that are incredibly obvious. Look at what has happened in the societies where income is most skewed, just look at the history of Latin America and it's extremely easy to see- a small minority owned nearly all the land, all the resources and all the capital. Such a ridiculously wealthy minority has no need to utilize all the resources in their optimal way, and the inequality has been very hard to eliminate. The national economy begins to stagnate, because the domestic market begins to shrink. Political freedom diminishes, because anyone can face the reality, that the richer you are, the more influence you will have. That small percentage of the population with vast resources can easily monopolize information, and thus monopolize power. They begin to be above the law, even. Government spending begins to slant strongly towards the interests that are controlling the information (and political power).
Sure, "Never in America!". Well, obvously it's not entirely like that now, but the thing with income inequality is that it can very easily spread. It takes two homeless people to produce several homeless children, and considering the fact that if the major interests that fund government campaigns have no need for public education, then education goes down. The underclass grows. In any relatively serious economic situation more join the underclass and not as many come out, all the while it becomes increasingly easier for the already very wealthy to keep expanding their wealth. All of it happening over the course of the years, obviously, not a sudden impact. But it's quite dangerous, and it could very well happen.
Ahh... so you are in to paying 'protection money'
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, is owed anything... you want it, earn it
You commit crimes to gain what you want, be prepared to pay the piper....
Pretty typical talk with all of the current social programs already in place. Let's take all of the "Faith Based programs" away and see how much more safer you will feel.
Fuck the moral standpoint, what about the argument of taking care of the poor so that they don't commit violent crimes against the upper classes? When one's survival depends on it, those in need will take from those that have something.
eliminate all entitlements, corporate and private... start taking responsibility for yourselves... it's a liberating experience
and funny... faith based programs are not government mandated.. not forced upon the people of a free society... not force funded by a socialist agenda driven style of government that is the goal of the libs
As for safe... I can protect myself, and I can take care of myself.... you see... I was raised conservative... I don't need someone to do things for me... and I certainly will not sell my vote for a welfare check
If youre excluded from society then you are no longer bound by its laws...
Who made up that rule ?
faith based programs are not government mandated.. not forced upon the people of a free society... not force funded by a socialist agenda driven style of government that is the goal of the libs
Just to bring back the point of all this, the justice of income inequality rest on the necessity of a free country and only works within one. The socialism verses capitalism debate has been over for some time. (Communism does not look good, even on paper!) One need only observe North and South Korea and have a half a brain. Europe is moving to the right and the more they do, the better off they become. (see: East Europe and Ireland) No wonder bad economic policies ravaged entire nations during the twentieth century, producing more victims than any epidemic did. The collectivization of land in Russia during the twenties, in China during the fifties, and in Tanzania during the sixties starved hundreds of millions of peasants. The uncontrolled printing of currency destabilized Weimar Germany, facilitating the rise of Nazism. The nationalization of enterprises and the expulsion of entrepreneurs ruined Argentina during the forties and Egypt a decade later. Indias License Rajrequiring businesses to obtain a host of permits before opening their doorsfroze the countrys economic development for decades, keeping millions impoverished.
On an even larger scale, the century witnessed a war between two economic systems: state socialism and market capitalism. In the socialist system, property was public, competition forbidden, and production planned. In the market system, property was private, competition encouraged, and production determined by entrepreneurs. Faced with the choice of which system was superior, nations hesitated and economists remained divided.
The state of affairs today is entirely different. When the Soviet Union crumbled, the socialist model that it embodied imploded, tooor, more precisely, the Soviet Union fell because the socialist economic system proved unworkable.
And we're supposed to think those are good numbers?
