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.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
A law is not a basis for a quantitative fact. Either the majority of workers are paid what they're worth or they're being paid less than that. Part of this revolves around the meaning of the word worth. It isn't just what the worker is "worth" to the employer. It is also the intrinsic worth of every human being, and what they SHOULD be entitled to receive. For 40 hours a weeks I'd saying that would be a living wage (that wage than can afford them a "living".
The laws of economics are like the laws of physics. If you don't like them: too bad.
Nope, the laws of economics are man-made and can be changed by altering the dynamics involved whereas the laws of physics cannot be altered by man.
As opposed to those other systems where all of the money ends up in the hands of the wealthy elite and the outcome is widespread poverty and brutal oppression followed by a revolution.
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
Will you ever get your nomenclature in order?
Capitalism has been around since Adam and Eve.
If circumstances dictate, our Federal and State Constitutions ALLOW for redistribution of assets and income.
If you find this distasteful, get behind a movement to change those Constitutions.
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
Will you ever get your nomenclature in order?
Capitalism has been around since Adam and Eve.
If circumstances dictate, our Federal and State Constitutions ALLOW for redistribution of assets and income.
If you find this distasteful, get behind a movement to change those Constitutions.
I am beginning to suspect that bripat is a Bot. The kneejerk trite responses with zero thought behind them are a dead giveaway.
that is how it is in the socialist utopias.
nothing good comes out of it - the system is not viable and eventually collapses.
As opposed to those other systems where all of the money ends up in the hands of the wealthy elite and the outcome is widespread poverty and brutal oppression followed by a revolution.
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
As opposed to those other systems where all of the money ends up in the hands of the wealthy elite and the outcome is widespread poverty and brutal oppression followed by a revolution.
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
Do you know what the quality of life was in Russia in 1917, compared to what it was, in 1980?
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
Will you ever get your nomenclature in order?
Capitalism has been around since Adam and Eve.
If circumstances dictate, our Federal and State Constitutions ALLOW for redistribution of assets and income.
If you find this distasteful, get behind a movement to change those Constitutions.
No, it hasn't been around since Adam and Eve. It certainly wasn't in force prior to 1800. The laws of economics have been around, but not capitalism. You obviously don't understand the meaning of the term.
The laws of economics are like the laws of physics. If you don't like them: too bad.
Nope, the laws of economics are man-made and can be changed by altering the dynamics involved whereas the laws of physics cannot be altered by man.
Wrong, the laws of economics cannot be changed. You can never convince a person to pay a higher price for a given product if he knows he can pay a lower price. There is no "dynamic" that can convince him otherwise.
It's interesting that you post this idiocy because now we understand why economic arguments are unable to penetrate the skulls of leftturds.
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
Do you know what the quality of life was in Russia in 1917, compared to what it was, in 1980?
It was probably a lot better.
that is how it is in the socialist utopias.
nothing good comes out of it - the system is not viable and eventually collapses.
As opposed to those other systems where all of the money ends up in the hands of the wealthy elite and the outcome is widespread poverty and brutal oppression followed by a revolution.
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
Nope, the laws of economics are man-made and can be changed by altering the dynamics involved whereas the laws of physics cannot be altered by man.
Wrong, the laws of economics cannot be changed. You can never convince a person to pay a higher price for a given product if he knows he can pay a lower price. There is no "dynamic" that can convince him otherwise.
It's interesting that you post this idiocy because now we understand why economic arguments are unable to penetrate the skulls of leftturds.
The laws of economics can easily be changed. If economics determine that the cost of education is X, and only certain people can afford X, thus only certain people can receive an education,
the government can pass laws that shift resources in a manner that makes education available to the people who could not otherwise afford it.
The fact that you have decided to remain a citizen of a land where the Supreme Law of the Land authorizes the government to collect taxes, means that you HAVE agreed to that taxation..
Wrong. As I said previously, the federal government doesn't own the United States. Living in a given location doesn't constitute consent to anything, especially to third parties. When you rent an apartment, you sign a lease. You give your consent explicitly to pay rent. The kind of "consent" you are talking about is what a Mafioso extortion racket enforces. It claims a business "consents" to pay for "protection" because it decided to locate on the turf of the extortion racket. Your theory of "consent" is indistinguishable from the Mafioso definition of the term. It's the ethical system of a criminal enterprise.
Yes, those are the choices the government extortion racket imposes on me. However, they still do not constitute any form of consent. What you're saying is that if a mugger gives you a choice of handing over your wallet or taking a bullet, then you have consented to taking a bullet when you decline to hand over your wallet.
Again, that's the ethical system of organized crime.
Would you call the entire Constitution null and void, since it was written and ratified before you (and any other American citizen alive today) were born, and so did not get your personal blessing?
Yes, I would call it null and void. No person in this country is ethically bound by any terms in the Constitution. I never consented to it. How could I? I wasn't even born when it was adopted.
If you would like more information on this subject, read "Constitution of no Authority" by Lysander Spooner.
That has to be the DUMBEST response I have ever seen in this forum.
Where did you get the idea that giving the richest 0.1% of your fellow citizens more income enhances your freedom or diminishes the power of government?Again, there is no theft involved here between me and the group. We both agreed beforehand what we would do, both sides stuck to the deal, both are happy with the exchange.
Strange that you have no problem at all where YOUR MONEY was REDISTRIBUTED as "tax cuts" to the wealthy elite "job creators". Furthermore none of the "jobs" that they were supposed to "create" ever materialized either. So basically the wealthy elite have stolen $1+ Trillion of YOUR MONEY and given you NOTHING in exchange.
Why aren't you holding them accountable for stealing from you?
Once again, reductions in marginal rates do not meet the definition of "income distribution." The term means taking from one person and giving to another. Reducing the amount the government takes is not redistribution.
However, lefturds like yourself want to redefine the term so the can apply the same negative label to any policy change in the direction of less government and more freedom..
Will you ever get your nomenclature in order?
Capitalism has been around since Adam and Eve.
If circumstances dictate, our Federal and State Constitutions ALLOW for redistribution of assets and income.
If you find this distasteful, get behind a movement to change those Constitutions.
No, it hasn't been around since Adam and Eve. It certainly wasn't in force prior to 1800. The laws of economics have been around, but not capitalism. You obviously don't understand the meaning of the term.
Yeah, right...
Capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Guess what, Capitalism NEVER exists in a void. Never has, never will.
Capitalism has been around since Adam and Eve.
Prove otherwise.
Even Abraham paid universally accepted money for the cave.
How old are you? 17?
Wrong. As I said previously, the federal government doesn't own the United States. Living in a given location doesn't constitute consent to anything, especially to third parties. When you rent an apartment, you sign a lease. You give your consent explicitly to pay rent. The kind of "consent" you are talking about is what a Mafioso extortion racket enforces. It claims a business "consents" to pay for "protection" because it decided to locate on the turf of the extortion racket. Your theory of "consent" is indistinguishable from the Mafioso definition of the term. It's the ethical system of a criminal enterprise.
Yes, those are the choices the government extortion racket imposes on me. However, they still do not constitute any form of consent. What you're saying is that if a mugger gives you a choice of handing over your wallet or taking a bullet, then you have consented to taking a bullet when you decline to hand over your wallet.
Again, that's the ethical system of organized crime.
Yes, I would call it null and void. No person in this country is ethically bound by any terms in the Constitution. I never consented to it. How could I? I wasn't even born when it was adopted.
If you would like more information on this subject, read "Constitution of no Authority" by Lysander Spooner.
That has to be the DUMBEST response I have ever seen in this forum.
Where did you get the idea that giving the richest 0.1% of your fellow citizens more income enhances your freedom or diminishes the power of government?Strange that you have no problem at all where YOUR MONEY was REDISTRIBUTED as "tax cuts" to the wealthy elite "job creators". Furthermore none of the "jobs" that they were supposed to "create" ever materialized either. So basically the wealthy elite have stolen $1+ Trillion of YOUR MONEY and given you NOTHING in exchange.
Why aren't you holding them accountable for stealing from you?
Once again, reductions in marginal rates do not meet the definition of "income distribution." The term means taking from one person and giving to another. Reducing the amount the government takes is not redistribution.
However, lefturds like yourself want to redefine the term so the can apply the same negative label to any policy change in the direction of less government and more freedom..
As opposed to those other systems where all of the money ends up in the hands of the wealthy elite and the outcome is widespread poverty and brutal oppression followed by a revolution.
What other system is that? Under capitalism, the quality of life for the average man improved by leaps and bounds. In the year 1800, the average lifespan was 34. Now it's 78. Today even people on welfare own a car, a refrigerator, air conditioning, electricity, an auto mobile, a cell phone and a flat screen TV.
These are all products of capitalism and would have all been viewed as fantastic luxuries in 1800.
Your claim is obvious horseshit. It always has been. Nevertheless, the left keeps promoting this lie.
And how would that system have worked if everyone had claimed they were above the law,
as you do?
Do you know what the quality of life was in Russia in 1917, compared to what it was, in 1980?
It was probably a lot better.
If we all agree that you're a retard, will you not clutter up the board repeatedly reminding us? Is that a fair deal?
Wrong, the laws of economics cannot be changed. You can never convince a person to pay a higher price for a given product if he knows he can pay a lower price. There is no "dynamic" that can convince him otherwise.
It's interesting that you post this idiocy because now we understand why economic arguments are unable to penetrate the skulls of leftturds.
The laws of economics can easily be changed. If economics determine that the cost of education is X, and only certain people can afford X, thus only certain people can receive an education,
the government can pass laws that shift resources in a manner that makes education available to the people who could not otherwise afford it.
You can manipulate supply, as you just pointed out. But that only shifts the cost. The laws of economics remain unchanged in your example.
No, it hasn't been around since Adam and Eve. It certainly wasn't in force prior to 1800. The laws of economics have been around, but not capitalism. You obviously don't understand the meaning of the term.
Yeah, right...
Capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Guess what, Capitalism NEVER exists in a void. Never has, never will.
Capitalism has been around since Adam and Eve.
Prove otherwise.
Even Abraham paid universally accepted money for the cave.
How old are you? 17?
You lose credibility the minute you post something from an obviously biased site like Wiki to support your claims.
In the first place Mercantilism, social-market economy, so-called "corporate capitalism" and the mixed economy are not capitalism. At best, they are corruptions of capitalism. Furthermore, aside from Mercantilism, none of these examples existed prior to 1800, and that only existed for a couple of hundred years preceding.
Yeah, right...
Capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Guess what, Capitalism NEVER exists in a void. Never has, never will.
Capitalism has been around since Adam and Eve.
Prove otherwise.
Even Abraham paid universally accepted money for the cave.
How old are you? 17?
You lose credibility the minute you post something from an obviously biased site like Wiki to support your claims.
In the first place Mercantilism, social-market economy, so-called "corporate capitalism" and the mixed economy are not capitalism. At best, they are corruptions of capitalism. Furthermore, aside from Mercantilism, none of these examples existed prior to 1800, and that only existed for a couple of hundred years preceding.
SO basically you are omitting Ancient Egypt, Rome, Greece, etc as prime examples of private ownership and transaction that were subject to taxes and legislation; sound familiar?.
Corruptions of Capitalism?
The only non-corrupt Capitalism that history has ever experienced has been that of America and has resulted in at least 4 major economic collapses.?.
Unfettered Capitalism doesn't work in the long run, or shall we say the gas usually runs out after 2-4 years.
Never has, never will.
Your knowledge of history is wretched...for god's sake, You thought Hitler was a leftist.In the US, the government is by and for the people. The government creates all rights and laws.The Government creates nothing. All law in this Republic is derived from We the People....not the Government. That includes both tax law and basic property rights. Taxation as a form of wealth redistribution is either implied in the Constitution or directly approved by We the People. As a result it is not theft if We the People sanctioned it.
If We the People don't like how the Government is taxing us (ex. Obamacare) we can vote the bastards out. I think many will get voted out next November. That is how our system of Government works. So I guess to sum up, I sort of half agree with you.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, right. That's why the government sent troops to the Southern states to kill their citizens, burn their cities, loot their homes, rape their women and destroy everything within eyesight.
Lincoln has to be the biggest comedian that ever lived.
You lose credibility the minute you post something from an obviously biased site like Wiki to support your claims.
In the first place Mercantilism, social-market economy, so-called "corporate capitalism" and the mixed economy are not capitalism. At best, they are corruptions of capitalism. Furthermore, aside from Mercantilism, none of these examples existed prior to 1800, and that only existed for a couple of hundred years preceding.
SO basically you are omitting Ancient Egypt, Rome, Greece, etc as prime examples of private ownership and transaction that were subject to taxes and legislation; sound familiar?.
The rules in those societies differed significantly from what we would call private ownership. For instance, in the Roman Empire powerful Senators were often able to simply appropriate the land of small free-holders.
Corruptions of Capitalism?
The only non-corrupt Capitalism that history has ever experienced has been that of America and has resulted in at least 4 major economic collapses.?.
All the major collapses were caused by government meddling in the economy.
Unfettered Capitalism doesn't work in the long run, or shall we say the gas usually runs out after 2-4 years.
Never has, never will.
Unfettered capitalism works beautifully. The United States has had the closest thing to it, and as a result we are one of the richest countries in the world.
The gas runs out when government starts imposing price controls and regulations that restrict drilling.
