Don`t Eat Your Dog: Morality and Free Enterprise

Submitted by: ozzymandiaas 4 years ago

This video explains why our bitter political fight in America isn"t really class warfare, but economic morality.
There are 118 comments:
Male 5,811
@5cats: No, mennonites didn`t protest, scientists did. I`m frustrated that they even had to, because with all the specific cuts to environmental programs and institutes it`s blatantly clear they`re willing to trade our environment for the sake of business.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
vv K, all is good!
Mennonites protested science in Ontario??? Weirdness! Not that I doubt you but is there a link? Now I`m all curious!

The history lesson of the day:
Mennonites were asked by the Tsar in the 1800`s to move from Germany to Ukraine because they were EXCELLENT farmers and peaceful too! They were promised many things, including NO military service and keeping their German language.
Things started to get ugly in the 1890`s (apx) when it looked like the Tsar was trying to change the deal. At the same time Canada began to actively advertise in Europe for people to move to Saskachewan Territory.
So lots of Mennonites, Hudderites and other Germans, Ukranians and Poles moved to Manitoba, Sask, The Dakotas and other remote places.

Tah dah! The 0.05 tour of history!
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@5cats: That link didn`t say anything about mennonites so I hadn`t paid it much mind as it seemed to be affecting more than just your particular group. That doesn`t justify any insincerity on my part, I`ll chalk it up to frustrations concerning the science protest in Ottawa. Inexcusable in any event, my apologies.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]I didn`t say in my list that any of those things are exclusive to rich or poor people,[/quote]
So @patchy? Why list them at all? It leaves the door open to misunderstanding while serving no real purpose. Eh?

You DID check out the Holodomor Link from before? Yes? Suggesting that my ancestors "just ran away" is like saying the Jews "deserved to burn" in those ovens. While we may have escaped before the Tsar was mean to us, many didn`t make it out and went on to suffer under the Tsar, Lenin and most especially Stalin. FYI: I`m really not happy about that comment.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
That being said I don`t classify all mennonites in that respect, one of my best friends is a mennonite, although not from the traditional stock. So I`ll see your punch and raise you a kick in the junk.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@5cats: So should I have started a new paragraph after that sentence? I gave a list of things that separate people, and the sentence before I was bemoaning how conservatives consider everyone on equal footing in terms of ability to achieve success. I didn`t say in my list that any of those things are exclusive to rich or poor people, many now rich people grew up in poverty. You`re trying to tell me what argument I`m making and you`re just wrong. The reason I mentioned rich people is because that`s what the whole post was about. I didn`t say WHAT the rich have that the poor don`t, you just assumed I meant the rich have no obstacles. I`m not responsible for your improper assumptions, take some responsibility.

The mennonites I grew up with wore that garb, and I know the difference between hutterites and such, I used to drive past a colony every day. On a whole I don`t care much for mennonites, as most that I`ve known have been racist, ignorant farmer-types.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
vv Ad hominum = best @markust can do.

Sad, eh?
0
Reply
Male 4,298
What did your parents do to you? You behave like a 40-49 year old junior high school girl.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]...an honest political conversation.[/quote]
THAT is what passes as "honest" in lib-tard land these days? Honestly?
Trolling?
Moving Goalposts?
Lies? (ad hominum attack = lie, fyi)



Boo hoo hoo! Whatever shall I do? Wherever shall I go?


0
Reply
Male 36,512
If you were starving to death = strawman.
Weaksauce poured all over it to boot...
0
Reply
Male 4,298
You are so absorbed in the world of opinion media I knew you would flip out if I moved the goal post. You losing your sh*t is the only entertainment that you add to this entertainment site. I`ll go back to ignoring you. Your mind is too brainwashed for an honest political conversation.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
Hummm, upon further research: it seems Mennonites outside the Canadian Prairies DO wear the traditional garb!
While it is manditory for Hutterites, it`s optional for Mennonites. VERY few Mennonites I`ve ever met wear traditional outfits unless it`s a special occasion.
There`s LOTS of Mennonites out here ;-) believe me!

Anyhow, they`re both "good folks" in my books!

It got cut-off below: My family tree went Catholic in 1896, but still remained immersed in & part of the Mennonite community in Saskatchewan.
0
Reply
Male 598
If you were starving to death, would you take 1 marshmallow now or stare at it for 15 minutes to get 2? And does it make you wrong or bad at long-term planning if you decide to take 1 in that situation?
My point being that a person that needs something now is different than a child that wants a treat, so you shouldnt use that study when we are talking about families that are struggling for basic needs every day.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
"I know enough about them and their ankle-length skirts and kerchiefs in the hair..."
Um, @patchy? Apparently NO, you do NOT!

Mennonite
Hutterite
Doukhobors (while I`m at it)

That punch in the face still stands...

"everyone starts off with the same ability to achieve WHAT THE RICH ALREADY HAVE, which is blatantly false"
See it? You`ve implied the rich are ALL "already there" while the poor suffer from those disadvantages you list.

SO: People are all different, yet they should ALL have the EXACT same wealth? Or else it`s "unfair"?? I really don`t
0
Reply
Male 36,512
Cripes @markust! I was willing to live and let live but you continue sucking Obama`s... Spin!

I have linked YOUR OWN data to show you how completely and utterly WRONG you are, but you attemt to "move the goalposts"? Pathetic.

Barack Obama`s debt begins in Jan 20 2010? WTF? Bush is now responsible for Obama`s "Stimulus Part 2" also? ObamaCare? How drating dishonest ARE you? Very much so, apparently.

Don`t worry your lib-tard arse about ignoring me @markust, unless you smarten up a whole lot? THAT will be MOOT...
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]And I never said that things were black OR white.[/quote]
No. No you didn`t.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@5cats: The community I grew up in was predominantly mennonite, I know enough about them and their ankle-length skirts and kerchiefs in the hair as well as their methods of business and fighting and such.

[quote]BUT you implied that "the rich" DO NOT suffer from this sort of upbringing[/quote]
When did I imply that exactly? Was it when I said "make every person start out in a different place. "? I never singled out the rich as never having disadvantages, you came to that conclusion on your own. My point was simply that: that you can`t paint all people`s upbringing with the same brush.

[quote]I never said that noone that is one of those situations DOES not work hard. [/quote]
And I never wrote a sarcastic paragraph implying that you did.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Fiscal progressives don`t argue that the outcomes are unjust, they argue that the very game is unjust.<<<

And then they proceed with redistribution of wealth and dismantling any form of free market or competition. And your analogy is just as flawed, in a free market system there is no prohibition of `taking the test.`
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Firstly, communism does not result in no wealthy people and no impoverished people. That is just uninformed. People still work and people still earned what they have. <<<<

Ok with the first sentence the second you surly meant as a joke right?? The wealthy people in the USSR worked for it, or were they party hacks??
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>A person who makes 100,000 a year as a lawyer doesnt nessisarily work harder than someone who makes less. <<<

No however they are likely to have made different decisions in the past that put them in the position they are currently in. In some cases it was hard, but not impossible, to have made a different decisions but they made that decision non the less.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
@patchy: "I never said those people don`t amount to anything,"
BUT you implied that "the rich" DO NOT suffer from this sort of upbringing: that they`re given some sort of advantage it`s impossible for "poor people" to have. Grey areas, not Black & White, remember? You keep saying one thing while also saying the opposite... (not hypocricy! Inconsistancy)

"5cats, mennonites have been attacked for decades because you`re pacifists..."
Yup!
"All your ancestors did was run away."
Nope!

While we are peacful in large numbers, as individuals Mennonites are quite willing and able to "mix it up". If you were in my presence and said that I`d punch you right in the face, for reals, I`m not joking.

This Link Explains Why

Note: My family went Catholic in 1896, but remai
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>@dang007: Way to miss my point entirely. I never said those people don`t amount to anything<<<

And way to miss my point entirely. I never said that noone that is one of those situations DOES not work hard. And I never said that things were black OR white.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>.Tell that to companies with overwhelming majority of their respective market share.
<<<

Really...... Let`s see do you mean IBM, or perhaps you mean standard Oil, or perhaps the Dutch East Indian Company?
0
Reply
Male 4,298
Bill Clintons budget for 2001 only raised the debt 194 Billion under George W Bush`s first year. So I can see why conservatives don`t want to use the truth.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
You`re going to scream bloody murder but the true factor is to attribute the first year to the last President because budgets are already in place when the new president takes office. With that reality in place:

George W Bush Jan 20 2002 - Jan 20 2010: Debt raised 6.3 Trillion
Barack Obama Jan 20 2010 - current: Debt raised 3.5 Trillion

Scream all you want but that is the reality.
0
Reply
Male 369
CONTINUED
Firstly, communism does not result in no wealthy people and no impoverished people. That is just uninformed. People still work and people still earned what they have. A person who makes 100,000 a year as a lawyer doesnt nessisarily work harder than someone who makes less. The "road to communism" that some democrats want only would make people who work get similar wages to others who work just as hard per hour.
Secondly, the arguement that someone has found success from every diffrent situation doesnt change the fact that more people have found success from alot of similar situations. There is not the same ratios of religion, race, disability, ect. in the top 1% as there is overall. Another thing that would help equal the playing field between wealthty people and average people is that most wealthy people get their money from stock, which has a much lower tax rate than income tax.
This video is just uninformed propaganda.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
Ha, you got me 5Cats. But I`ll call this a draw since we were both wrong in our number. Let this be a lesson to you to never trust the numbers in stupid picture graphs that are passed around. And a lesson to me to read the picture more closely. I thought it said Bush had raised it that much not all the presidents combined.
0
Reply
Male 369
I honestly dont see how a single one of his scenarios have ANYTHING to do with free enterprise. The marshmallow study only proves that people who think with long term goals are more sucessful. The global poverty decrease was caused by urbanization and industrialization, the simple process of turning a 3rd world country into a 2nd or 1st world country. Their type of economy has little to do with type of economy.
The anti-communism aspect of his arguement comes from nothing more than 1.) people are happiest to have worked for what they have and 2.) people all have the same ability to acchieve regardless of race, religion, disability, and socioeconomic staning.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]As a result the advantage that a person may have for a time does not last forever[/quote]
Tell that to companies with overwhelming majority of their respective market share.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@dang007: Way to miss my point entirely. I never said those people don`t amount to anything, stop deliberately misconstruing my real point, which was that "hard work" isn`t as cut-and-dry as you make it seem. Someone can work very hard but have specific disadvantages that preclude them from being able to obtain the level of success that other people that don`t have those hardships can obtain. The world is grey, not black-and-white.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Free enterprise leads to situations where the elite unfairly earn more than their work would be worth and the poor are barred from ever doing better for themselves. <<<

This is patently absurd. Yes some people will for a time gain advantage. But the free market is a system were these imbalances are eliminated in time as other products and markets are introduced. As a result the advantage that a person may have for a time does not last forever.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Substance abuse, broken homes, poverty, disease, socio-economic status, all these things make every person start out in a different place. <<<

That`s right no one who came from a broken home, raised in poverty, had a disease, was born at a low socio-economic status, or had a substance abuse problem ever amounted to anything.

Great point.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
Another thing this video (and most conservatives) always seem to think is that everyone starts off with the same ability to achieve what the rich already have, which is blatantly false. Substance abuse, broken homes, poverty, disease, socio-economic status, all these things make every person start out in a different place.

And since when is "living on $1 a day" considered the poverty line? What family anywhere in America lives on $365/yr? Up here I believe the poverty line is somewhere between $15,000-20,000. I could check the exact number but I`m just too lazy this morning.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]Hong Kong has a health care system mostly under government control, but with a private care option.[/quote]

You know how they decided on that? By doing a huge analysis of different systems of healthcare. They found models like Canada`s with a public standard and private option to provide the best overall care, whereas they found systems like that of the US to be the most costly and inefficient.

And to top it off, Hong Kong is constantly rated as the number one most capitalist place in the world, even by the Wall Street Journal. Universal healthcare is not communist, mmkay 5cats?

Also 5cats, mennonites have been attacked for decades because you`re pacifists, and those countries like Germany, Ukraine, Russia all wanted to take what you had. All your ancestors did was run away.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Unchecked a free market economy would run the working class into the ground if it weren`t for the laws. <<<

God forbid that you ever look at history...
0
Reply
Male 406
I call Bullcrap... how do you explain the European model? And before you start talking about the crisis I have to remind of how the supposed broke country of Iceland is dealing with not being in the union.
Yes there banks put them in massive debt but by not being in the euro union they simply devaluated there currency and now they are some of our most reliable customers, the crisis is another thing and you have it over there to. So Bull-crap to the notion the being socially responsible towards the poorest and helping them on there feet is bad...


wth trying fool me with propaganda delivered by a nice guy voice fratin frat frat.
0
Reply
Male 221
In blaming Obama don`t forget the USA was circling the drain in Jan 2009 and drastic things had to be done to shore up the economy. Oh and this video is BS
0
Reply
Male 36,512
More Math:
Obama: 5,250 / 41 months = 128 Billion PER MONTH
Bush: 4,900 / 96 months = 51 Billion per month

Add 7 more months at @128 per to the 15.879 = 16.775 the debt when Obama leaves office.
Thus he will add: 6.1 trillion (apx) give or take.

(waits for @markust to say "adjust for inflation"!!)
(it`s at an all-time low, duh! Doing that would likely make Bush`s debt increase look smaller too! Compared to all previous debt)
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]The Rich got that way either by being lucky or using this countries resources.[/quote]
@nottaspy: lolz! Lucky!!! Hard work? NOPE! Innovation? NOPE! Better service? NOPE! Fiscal Responsibility? NOPE! You`re so funny.

How about GROUPS of people, who pool their funds and make large investments? Don`t THEY deserve to have a fair return? Like Pension Funds (someone mentioned earlier) these investments WILL make them "rich" over time, is it a crime?

Back to @markust: Your OWN DATA proved my message and make a joke out of yours: Yes I said Omaba spent 8, it based on some data that said it was 7.8 when Bush left office, not 10.6 (which seems moe accurate). Perhaps the 7.8 came from when the Dems took the 2006 Mid-Terms? (site says 8.5, close!) But regardless: I`m correct. Your reply?
0
Reply
Male 36,512
"Only" 5.25 TRILLION dollars, it is to laugh how spinny that is!

10.6 (Obama sworn in)
5.7 (Bush sworn in)
= 4.9 Trillion @markust, over 8 NOT 3.5 years, BY YOUR OWN SOURCE`S NUMBERS.

Tell me AGAIN how Bush spent more.
Oh, and be sure to accuse me of "media influence" for doing simple math, I drating DARE you!

Various sources give various measures. @imnaked`s gives 404 Error...
0
Reply
Male 3,430
I`ve read a couple of huge fallacies in this thread.

One being that the rich want to drain the poor for all that the poor is worth.
How is hurting the bottom line going to make the rich richer?
Okay, maybe in a short term they will become richer, but once the bottom line is drained, there would be nothing left. How is that supposed to make them richer?

Unless the idea that soon there will be only one person/family with 100% of the wealth, then that is just asinine. Though I suppose I could be miss reading that.


Either way, I have no problem eating a dog I have no emotional connection to. Better to have a full stomach than to be lying in the street sleeping next to a dead dog with a growling stomach.
0
Reply
Male 881
What this video conveniently leaves out is that we have a social contract with one another that is apart of being citizens of the same country.

The Rich got that way either by being lucky or using this countries resources. We let them use those resources so they can make money and give back. We provide what is needed to the poor so that they have a chance to one day help themselves and also give back.

Free enterprise leads to situations where the elite unfairly earn more than their work would be worth and the poor are barred from ever doing better for themselves.

I do not believe that we should simply provide fish for all the hungry. But we should teach everyone to fish. That means providing everyone in this country with an education, healthcare, and whatever essentials that keep them from dying.

Extremes are almost always harmful. Capitalism and Socialism are both bad ideas on their own. A balance must be struck between the two.
0
Reply
Male 559
Wow...for a professor, his analogies are pretty poor. The issues don`t surround giving portions of higher grades to those with lower grades. A more proper analogy is that he only allows in the strongest students to the classroom to take the test, and then complains to the weaker students that they never showed up. Fiscal progressives don`t argue that the outcomes are unjust, they argue that the very game is unjust.
0
Reply
Male 27
Welp,i watched the whole video and i could not stop thinking about disabled warvets and other people that can not earn money because of a handicap or otherwise.How about pensioners,or employees in restaurants that earn below minimum wage.

Im sorry for the rant.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
@imnakdjumpme, forget January. As of today the debt has not surpassed the rise under George W Bush. Obama is sitting at $5.25 Trillion increase. This number can be easily checked here putting in Jan 20, 2009 as Obama`s first day in office. I`m not saying the debt growth under Obama isn`t frightening. I`m just curious if 5Cats can be man enough to admit he was wrong on his numbers.
0
Reply
Male 5,014
"They have to BORROW IT!" like they have allways and ever done. Ask China for more info. I repeat, is not democrats or republicans, this is just the lark-mirror created to devide people so they can`t see the reality. The real fact is that the USA illusion or dream, call it as you like, have show what really is...an illusion or a drewam in fact. Someone say that to live the "American dream" there is just one thing to do...keep sleeping.
0
Reply
Male 598
5Cats you are annoying with your misinformation and lolz.
as of Jan. 31, 2012, the rise under Obama had yet to surpass the rise under his predecessor, George W. Bush.http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/dueling-debt-deceptions/

Also, im all for incentivising people to work for their money, but the free market only helps the rich get richer, unless it is regulated.
People dont create jobs, demand creates jobs. so we need to build up the low and middle income people so they create more demand, so companies can hire more. 93% of all the wealth generated in 2010 went to the top 1% which just means the gap keeps growing and less will be spent back into the system.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
Thank you 5Cats for proving my second point - that you turn peoples words around and make them the exact opposite of what was said just so you can win arguments.

I don`t waste my time talking politics with people who are in deep with opinion media. Spin that all you want but it won`t change me. I`ve been in the opinion media world. I know what a negative place it is. I will not be drawn back into that world. I have no problem talking to conservatives about politics (if they are not wrapped up in opinion media). Conservatives and liberals who are outside of opinion media can find many common grounds. Opinion media has created this false divide as if we are defined by our politics. It just isn`t true. You sir are a walking talking cable news conservative which makes you a waste of time as far as talking politics goes.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
Bush left office: debt = 7.8 trillion
Obama Today = 15.8
(4 months to go to ring up MORE - keep that in mind!)

@piperfawn: you lost me, unless the cliff is in a desert...
Yes, all countries have overspent and are now in trouble because they refuse to CUT! THAT is the problem.
Not only does Obama not cut: he wildly spends even more!
This is money the USA DOES NOT HAVE! They have to BORROW IT!

And keep in mind: WHO got the Credit Rating Downgraded?

"Debt creats debt" Yeah, and how is DOUBLING the debt helping that? Honest question @piperfawn, you`ve been elusive with the answers today...
0
Reply
Male 5,014
Oh and 5Cats you know that debt create debt? When Obama started he allready had a gigantic debt on the shoulder, he didn`t start with a 0 he start with a lot of minus generating minus in an exponential way. Numbers are true but void without explanations.
0
Reply
Male 5,014
5Cats Obama is creating something that never exist before in his country, your country as near all the country in the world nowaday had to adjust the spending. This is the difference. But again if you are in a desert you prefere to have a bottle with few and maybe not so clean water or you prefere to not have the bottle at all?
0
Reply
Male 36,512
We cut spending, at least a little bit!
Obama`s answer: spend MORE!
0
Reply
Male 36,512
Lets see a few facts shall we:
#1: @fools: The Democrats controlled the Senate and House in 2006, in 2008 they held ALL THREE branches, but it`s STILL the Republican`s fault? Oy-Vey!
#2: True or False:

True is the correct answer.

US Debt Clock Today

And in 2008?

4 TRILLION lower!!
Note: if you "Blame Bush" for debt after he left office? Then you ALSO must Blame Obama for HIS debt after HE leaves office too. In 2008 Obama signed "Stimulus 2" for 850 BILLION! Remember that?

Sorry @piperfawn: I look at facts then form my own opinions. Canada faced a similar problem in the 90`s and CUT SPENDING (at lea
0
Reply
Male 5,014
"Omaba(Obama)and the Democrats are driving the USA off a cliff of debt!"
Oh seriously?
This is the real reason why people don`t apreciate what you say. That sentence show how you are subjected to bias and to mass media. USA is on the cliff of the debit if not in the middle of the hole allready since ages, is not Obama fault and is neither democrats fault, is the whole USA system that is broken since loooong time.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`Omaba and the Democrats are driving the USA off a cliff of debt!`

The car was off the cliff before Obama got into office. The way the Republicans have acted since 2008 is like the roadrunner cartoons where Wile E Coyote is still running above the canyon floor, and only falls once he realizes there`s no more ground beneath him.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]5Cats. You can have capitalism with a well structured welfare system that works great for ALL the residents of the country.[/quote]

Um, yeah? Is that a trick question?
As a Canadian from the West: WE brought a LOT of "social reform" into Canada via Tommy Douglas and the NDP. That was back then, the NDP are just Union Stooges now.
We of Mennonite heratige know a LOT about how co-operative living within a capatilist society. We practically invented it! lolz! Why do you think the Communists tried to kill us all?

I cannot for the life of me recall saying the UK was "socialist". Ever, not just this thread. France yes, duh! Europe in general? Perhaps.

Supporting "free market capitalism" isn`t black vs white either, eh? Irony? Hummm...
0
Reply
Male 36,512
@piperfawn: Hey, I`m a Canadian Patriot! I :heart: Canada!

It`s just sad to see my Southern Cousins making such a HUGE mistake!
And if their Economy suffers? OURS suffers!

Omaba and the Democrats are driving the USA off a cliff of debt! People like @markust only want to whine about nonsense: it`s easier than looking at the truth.

THAT`s one of the messages within this video btw...
0
Reply
Male 2,737
I`d eat Muffin.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Sweet Jeebus.

5Cats. You can have capitalism with a well structured welfare system that works great for ALL the residents of the country. In this country the rich can succeed, but the poor are kept with their head above the water. This does NOT maketh a communist government.

Let me introduce you to Gray (Not Fifty Shades Of...), it`s a colour between black and white. Try it some time!
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]You are up to your eyeballs in opinion media[/quote]
Allow me to use "Bing Translate"...
[quote]You have opinions which are different than mine[/quote]

[quote]I like to talk politics but only with people that have their own opinions.[/quote]
[quote]I only listen to people who already agree with me, otherwise their views mean nothing[/quote]

[quote]Not people who have had their opinions burned into their heads through repetition[/quote]
[quote]Not people who use facts and logic, I`m a leftist and have no place for that crap[/quote]

@markust: you claim "libertarianism" yadda-yadda! But spout far-left talking points like it one of those Menthos-Coke bottles. srsly!

I`d go on mocking you but I notice that your mind was made up a loooong time ago.

I note how you have COMPLETELY stopped talking about the subject and have moved into 100% personal attack mode...
0
Reply
Male 5,014
5Cats you love so much USA system and is ok, but have you ever immagine how would be if you go to live there and suddenly you start to understand what you have lost ( for example universal healtcare system)? Canada in my opinion is one of the most advanced ( if not the most) country in the world, you are rich, you have lot of wellfair, your politic tend to be not so linked with religion and your nature is astonishing....why you want to barter all this with something worst? Maybe you lack just some temperate weather but for the rest for me Canada could be a really nice place to pass my life. Do yourself a favor and enjoy the great conquers your country have achieved, is just a suggestion.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
"I like to talk politics but only with people that have their own opinions. Not people who have had their opinions burned into their heads through repetition."

And I will admit that I am a hypocrite when it comes to the health care debate because I was into opinion media when this went around the first time a few years back. I had a lot of garbage burned into my head, I should just excuse myself from healthcare debates because of this. I will do that now by getting off this thread.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
The reason you are on my ignore list 5Cats is because of three things:

First, I make every effort not to talk politics with people who are submersed in the world of opinion media. I do not talk politics with my parents for this reason. And I have removed Facebook friends for this reason. You are up to your eyeballs in opinion media. I like to talk politics but only with people that have their own opinions. Not people who have had their opinions burned into their heads through repetition. Sadly it is harder and harder to find people who are not polluted by opinion media.

Second, you turn peoples words around and make them the exact opposite of what was said just so you can win arguments. I can`t respect someone with that level of dishonesty and in turn can`t trust anything you say.

Third, you very very very rarely admit you are wrong. That is a sign of insecurity and weakness. I can`t respect someone who can not admit when they are wrong.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
vv kk, that makes more sense! I still don`t think it`s true though. Plenty of 3rd world shiite-holes with no healthcare: universal or otherwise!

I know you specified "industrialized" but since the topic includes "global poverty" I`ll make this point:
Unchecked capitalism or communism are both bad things! Rules and laws have been part of society since CAVEMAN times for a good reason: protecting ALL of the tribe is more important than a few members` enrichment.
However: Without reward there`s little incentive to work hard. I mean beyond what`s neccessary to survive, eh?
Free Enterprise (Capitalism) is the best way we know, throughout history, to fairly do this. (reward hard work)

Communism: Provides incentive with a rifle.
Capatilism: Provides incentive with money!

I know which one I like.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
"Insurance companies in America charge so much because they are for profit. We are the only civilized country in the world where for profit health insurance is not illegal. It is complete BS that we still allow it to be for profit. The focus in health care should be on the person not on the profit."

I was wrong on this statement. What I should have said is America is the only industrialized country in the world without a universal health insurance system. Not sure how I mixed that up with for Profit. I have made that erroneous statement many times. Whoops.
0
Reply
Male 5,014
McG i miss you.
0
Reply
Male 3,894
@5cats--you`re ignoring the parts of the bill that prevent insurance companies from doing exactly that.
0
Reply
Male 68
If it is truly free...there is no system to take advantage of as everyone has the same chance to succeed and fail.
To bad we have never had a truly free market.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Free market economy is not what improved poverty FFS! I don`t buy that at all. Unchecked a free market economy would run the working class into the ground if it weren`t for the laws.

What improved poverty rates, in the UK certainly, was the emergence of unions that look out for the workers.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
Yeah @markust: You`ve NEVER EVER insulted me!

Oh wait, it`s another FME! Oh dear Ghod he has no idea at all...
0
Reply
Male 4,746
Actually, this would work out just fine if it weren`t for the rich folk taking advantage of the system. "Trickle Down" economics is the same way. If the rich folks keep all the money and pay everyone else less and less, eventually you have poor folks who can`t afford anything. Good, hard working folks who work 12 hour shifts and can barely afford to eat. Then, you want to take away their health care, pensions and welfare safety net and call that moral and fair? There are only three types who would buy that idea. The filthy rich, the morally corrupt and the ridiculously stupid.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
"False Moral Equivelance" It`s too long to type over and over again: and your posts drip with it!

[quote]Pensions should be locked away in untouchable accounts.[/quote]
You failed "into to Economics" right? I`m simply aghast at this sentence!
Where do you plan to "lock away" the pensions? Not Banks, you hate those! lolz!
Part of the "pension" promised employees is based on it`s GROWTH over time: through investment. Shoving the money into a mattress LOSES money through inflation. K?

I`m not saying they should be looted: OBVIOUSLY those who do so should go directly to jail, DUH!

But that`s a "Legal Reform" issue, K?
Recall my list of "who screws you"? Banks, Insurances... Lawyers!

Is some of this getting past your "filters"?
0
Reply
Male 4,298
You can tell 5Cats is loosing an argument when he results to insults. I can`t believe I got sucked into an argument with him again. I need to stick hard to my ignore list which he is at the tip top.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
@Whitemn: It`s presumed he`s adjusted for inflation, eh? You are correct, it would be silly to compare 1970 dollars to 2010 dollars.

I think the timefreame he`s covering is longer, like from 1800 - 2000. Before "free market capitalism" began there was MORE poverty and it was worse (by far!) than what we call "poverty" today!
Hint: "Poor" people do not: own cellphones, x-boxes, designer shoes, get fat, have heat, clean water and 3 meals a day...

Just a short list, there`s a LOT more things the world`s truely poor don`t have that "1st world poor" take for granted. Still: they`re better off now, and Socialism isn`t the reason...
0
Reply
Male 4,298
"VV aaaand @markust is the first with the FME! Geez dude, he even warns against your `faulty logic` in the video!"

What does FME stand for? How is my logic wrong? Why is it OK to reward failed CEOs but at the same time it is perfectly fine to steal the pensions of the hard workers below the failed CEO? Stealing pensions is the exact opposite of rewarding fairness and hard work. Pensions should be locked away in untouchable accounts.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]5Cats, if that were true...[/quote]
@nubblins: Which "that"? I`ve been spouting off on so many topics :-) I`m glad to answer your question though.

@markust: Insurance Companies ARE "for profit" in Canada and I`m certain ALL OVER the world. Lloyds of London? Rings a bell?

[quote]Trickle Down Economics destroyed middle America.[/quote]
@markust: #1 comparing political philosophy with socio-economic reality in such a way is... idiotic? To put it mildly.

But you ARE "Captain FME" after all!

#2: The US economy pulled OUT of Carter`s recession and BOOMED for 8+ years, spanning Reagan, Bush-I and Clinton`s first term.
Facts, aquaint ones-self with them.
0
Reply
Male 155
I find odd is his last statement #3 he talks about far less people are in poverty(earning 1$ a day) when the value of a dollar since 1970 is far less.(at 6m mark)
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]in a way that coerces people into buying your product, no matter what price you set for it.[/quote]
@DrProfessor: ic! Like if a LAW was passed that FORCED someone to buy a product, say Insurance, even if they didn`t want it or need it! THEN the Insurance Companies could jack up the prices as high as they like since you CANNOT refuse to buy it, you`ll go to JAIL! $ca-chinga$

[quote]That`s why people like red tape.[/quote]
Nooo, it`s corporations who LOVE "red tape" ok? They love to use it on their competition! Why do you think hundreds if not thousands of UNIONS have been granted "exemptions" from ObamaCare? Certain companies get exempt, others not, hummmm. I`m SO CERTAIN political donations has nothing at all to do with it...
PS: It`s been going on since 1800 in America: using "laws" as a corporate weapon...
0
Reply
Male 6,737
I`m so glad I can think in a third dimension of politics. Somewhere outside the Cons/Lib that many Americans are blinkered with.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
"The liberals destroyed the "middle ground" decades ago"

BS. Trickle Down Economics destroyed middle America.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
"Before even trying to socailize healthcare perhaps they should look at why it charges so damn much! Just a thought before we all have to pay for it not like insurance companies would ever get together and take advantage of such a thing"

Insurance companies in America charge so much because they are for profit. We are the only civilized country in the world where for profit health insurance is not illegal. It is complete BS that we still allow it to be for profit. The focus in health care should be on the person not on the profit.
0
Reply
Female 1,743
5Cats, if that were true, we`d already have universal healthcare.


:`( Too bad it isn`t.
0
Reply
Male 36,512
VV aaaand @markust is the first with the FME! Geez dude, he even warns against your `faulty logic` in the video!

@Buiadh: The liberals destroyed the "middle ground" decades ago...
0
Reply
Male 226
"I don`t really see a problem with eating the dog, so long as the body isn`t dirty and the family doesn`t mind it. I mean, were it my dog, I probably wouldn`t eat it considering that I don`t even know if dog tastes good, and I don`t have any trouble affording dinner from the store. That and, you know, the emotional attachment that would lead me to respect the corpse for sentimental reasons."

Yeah, I agree with the overall message, but it`s not immoral to eat the dog. Socially unacceptable? Yes. If you killed the dog and didn`t eat it, that would be immoral. I don`t see how eating something that is dead is immoral.
0
Reply
Female 1,743
@onoff

Older children can to build responsibility, but never to the point of being a job that is forced because they have to support their family. Kids should get to be kids, regardless of their socioeconomic status.
0
Reply
Male 3,894
Now that I`ve gotten past the dog portion of the video, this guy is using a straw-man argument for his opponents. They aren`t just crying because some people get left out in the cold. The problem with the free market is that it isn`t really free. You see, it`s incredibly profitable to corner the market in a way that coerces people into buying your product, no matter what price you set for it. As an example, look at college textbooks. They`ve found a niche where it`s imperative that you own the books in order to get through college, and at this point in time, it`s imperative that you go through college. They`ve got you over a barrel, and they proceed to mount you and mercilessly pound out of hundreds of dollars. That`s why people like red tape. It helps combat coercion in the "free" market.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
There are people in the middle class who have worked their asses off their whole life only to see their pensions stolen. That is one of the places the distribution system is unfair. The CEO`s in these same companies still received humungous amounts of money even though they failed. How is that fair? Why are CEO`s still rewarded when they fail? When the workers fail they are let go with no compensation.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>Again @5Cats, please understand there is a middle ground that works great!<<

Gee I hope you do not go to the hospital and get thirsty....
0
Reply
Male 14,330
Before even trying to socailize healthcare perhaps they should look at why it charges so damn much! Just a thought before we all have to pay for it not like insurance companies would ever get together and take advantage of such a thing........
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Again @5Cats, please understand there is a middle ground that works great!
0
Reply
Male 3,894
I don`t really see a problem with eating the dog, so long as the body isn`t dirty and the family doesn`t mind it. I mean, were it my dog, I probably wouldn`t eat it considering that I don`t even know if dog tastes good, and I don`t have any trouble affording dinner from the store. That and, you know, the emotional attachment that would lead me to respect the corpse for sentimental reasons.

But hey. To each their own. I wouldn`t begrudge someone a little dog-stew, especially if it wasn`t cruelly obtained.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
They make you believe hard work get rewarded because the richs need you to work hard for them... that is all
0
Reply
Male 36,512
[quote]for every person that succeeds in this system, more fail,[/quote]
@Buiadh: That`s true, but here`s the IMPORTANT PART: they have the >>freedom<< to try again! Or not! The US gov`t doesn`t hold a gun to people`s head and say "You will now smelt iron" like Mao did... (killing millions of people through starvation btw)

@antagonizer: Your scenario is NOT more realistic: plenty of millionaires have lost it all, and plenty of hard working, honest folks have become millionaires: it`s a fact! The method in the video represents Communism to a "T".

[quote]There is no such thing as free healthcare or free higher education[/quote]
WE HAVE A WINNER! @dang007 gets it!

[quote]I also don`t know very many who think we should "redistribute the wealth."[/quote]
LOLZ! @FP: You`re funny! Try Barak Hussain Obama for one...
0
Reply
Male 635
@Buiadh Sorry what does what mean?
0
Reply
Male 36,512
3:16 Perhaps "sacrifice" isn`t the best word, but I can`t think of a better one. Persist? Endure hardship? WORK (he already uses that word a lot).

4:18 "spread the wealth around" Hummm, which modern politican said those EXACT words? He was answering Joe The Plumber`s question on raising taxes...

Outstanding!
I await the inevitable lib-tard attacks. "False Moral Equivelance" The #1 lefty weapon!
0
Reply
Male 6,737
@dang - What does that even mean!? I have a feeling you don`t actually know what you`re talking about and are falling back on rusty rhetoric supplied by your republican friends.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>How is the health care overhaul harmful to free enterprise? It requires most people to buy from a private insurance company.<<<

Because enterprise is not `free` if the GOVERNMENT requires people to make a purchase, or as in the case of the health care reform, make a purchase from Bill to by something from Sam.
0
Reply
Male 635
And Buiadh just made my point. "failed states à la Greece."

0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Nationalised healthcare systems produce lower mortality rates<<<

Really???? To me the purpose of health care is to cure me when I am ill. There are several statistics that show that the system in the US has a higher cure rate, that`s lower mortality, from the most common forms of cancer.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
@dang007 and @onoffonoffon Just made my point exactly. It`s either MURICUUUUUUUUUUUH or it`s failed states à la Greece.

You can`t all be lost causes, surely?
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>The rich gain wealth from wealth not hard work like the other classes. <<

One of the two main differences between the liberal point of view and the conservative point of view.

Liberals, Every(most) rich got there through luck and/or oppression of others. All the poor are poor through no fault of their own just bad luck.

Conservatives, The rich are rich because of their hard work. The poor are poor due to their lack of hard work.
0
Reply
Male 1,311
I skipped the bullpoo. I love eating muffins. The dog would of been no exception.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
This is a false argument to me. I don`t know a lot of people on the left who don`t believe people shouldn`t work hard to earn a living. I also don`t know very many who think we should "redistribute the wealth." There are even fewer people in government who think that way. If Obama is a leftist, it`s only because the Republican party has moved much further to the right.

How is the health care overhaul harmful to free enterprise? It requires most people to buy from a private insurance company. That`s more customers for the private sector. Hong Kong has a health care system mostly under government control, but with a private care option. Do you think of socialism when you think Hong Kong? No, you think a free enterprise society that uses a flat-tax (a libertarian`s wet dream).
0
Reply
Male 303
"most good for most vulnerable"

Tell that to the sick and disabled. Nationalised healthcare systems produce lower mortality rates, less debt and when combined with a welfare system the best quality of life for the disabled.

There`s no such thing as free enterprise as there are no free markets. Rigging markets in your favour is good business, hence why every company is trying (and many succeeding) to do it. The markets favour whomever controls them, and i`d much rather that not be corporations.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Come join us! The waters lovely!<<

Sorry I have been in Athens during a riot. I think I will stay here. Have fun.
0
Reply
Male 635
>>>Is it free healthcare, free higher education<<<

There is no such thing as free healthcare or free higher education..... So your question makes no sense.

If your question is should we take EXTRA from higher income earners to pay for OTHER people`s healthcare and education, then yes it is income redistribution. Whether or not this is good or bad is a separate question.
0
Reply
Female 2,602
[quote]I see nothing wrong with eating the dog.[/quote]

That`s lovely. But enough about your sex life, we`re discussing economics here.
0
Reply
Male 138
I see nothing wrong with eating the dog.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
*Continued*

Hey why did it chop off my post? It said I`d done exactly 1000 characters... Heads will roll.

What I was going to finish off with was:

There is a middle ground between Communism and Unfettered Capitalism, America. Come join us! The waters lovely!
0
Reply
Female 2,602
[quote]I switched off at "Freedom". Meaningless word. [/quote]

It`s one of those words like "hood" and "pants" that mean something different over here to what they mean in Americaland. When they say it, it means "the ability to do exactly what the government tells you to do".
0
Reply
Male 508
Tho he makes some great points, his classroom experiment is invalid as the points he is redistributing are attained from hard work. The rich gain wealth from wealth not hard work like the other classes. If you want to make it realistic, start it from;the standpoint that some students already are guaranteed a pass some are 50-50 and others are guaranteed a fail. Allow them to INVEST their banked points into acquiring more points by `paying for` A`s, and let the experiment continue. I guarantee a different result.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
I switched off at "Freedom". Meaningless word.

Why can`t Americans (I hate to generalise, but it seems they don`t get it) understand theat there can be a middle ground?

The free enterprise system *is* the only way that works at present. (Sadly for every person that succeeds in this system, more fail, but that`s another story.) But giving some of that money to the poor in the form of a well structured welfare state can coincide quite happily.

I`m not poor. I earn a basic wage that is higher than average in the UK and I guess if you were to pigeon hole me, I`d be lower-middle class. I have worked hard to be where I am today and have stable employment in dangerous times as a reward.

But I give to charity regularly. The UK has one of the largest welfare systems in the world, which has its faults but I support it whole heartedly. I pay my taxes and I am happy for that tax to be used to pay for health, education and services.

There is a
0
Reply
Female 2,602
If you can`t be bothered to sit through all seven minutes of this patronising diatribe, allow me to summarise it for you:

Video: "I propose that fluffy kittens and sunny weather are good!!"

Viewers: "Yay!"

Video: "And I propose that kicking grandmothers in the shins is bad!"

Viewers: "Booooo!!"

Video: "Having money doesn`t make you happy."

Viewers: "But we`ve never been in any situation where having some made it any worse!"

Video: "Not having money doesn`t make you happy, either!"

Viewers: "OK, get to the f*cking point!!"

Video: "So, in conclusion, don`t do drugs."

Viewers: "I never wanted to before, but I do now after listening to a blowhard like you for seven minutes."


The End.
0
Reply
Male 380
Define "Income redistribution"....

Is it free healthcare, free higher education and support for people unable, not unwilling, but unable to provide for themselves?

Cause free enterprise can easily grow and thrive in such a socity, where workers are well educated and live long and healthy lives.
0
Reply
Female 1,743
lost me at "most good for most vulnerable"

Children shouldn`t be working and/or sacrificing.
0
Reply
Male 260

0
Reply
Male 37,890

The "Right to Pursue Happiness" does not mean the gov`ment has to guarantee you get happiness.

The only valid arguement in favor of free enterprise is that our current system is failing and we have to have drastic changes or we`ll completely collapse.
0
Reply
Male 3
Link: Don`t Eat Your Dog: Morality and Free Enterprise [Rate Link] - This video explains why our bitter political fight in America isn`t really class warfare, but economic morality.
0
Reply