Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Forums _ Debate _ socialism v. capitalism:
Posted by: NoSex Mar 26 2009, 01:45 PM
i view capitalism as a mode of economic & social infancy. i think that it is regressive to society, poisonous, & under-developing.
i point to these basic "flaws" in capitalism*:
1. the emphasis on profit as opposed to utility.
2. the creation of oligarchy & plutocracy.
3. the unfair/uneven distribution of wealth.
4. the creation of a significant class divide.
5. the inability of capitalism, alone, to provide the people with necessities.
6. the exploitation of the working class.
7. the existence of crime in excess, caused by class struggle, poverty, & proletariat anxiety.
8. the creation of an oppressive institution (i.e. the police state, the church, the education system) in order to secure profits to a specific & elite population.
i point to these basic "benefits" in socialism*:
1. the emphasis on utility.
2. the destruction of plutocracy & (in many forms) oligarchy.
3. the fair distribution of wealth.
4. the destruction of a significant class divide.
5. the ability of socialism to provide for its people, necessities.
6. the affirmation of the working class.
7. the absence of crime invoked by squalor & proletariat anxiety.
8. the destruction of specific oppressive institutions & the opportunity to reform the state (i.e. despite the pull of capital & profits).
DISCUSS.
*quotation marks provided for argument's sake. whatever.
Posted by: kryogenix Mar 26 2009, 02:05 PM
I'm not opposed to socialistic ideals/systems nor do I necessarily fully support capitalism
But let's see. Socialism is a system that's bound to be taken advantage of by lazy individuals. They'll take the fair distribution of wealth and they'll not put in their fair share of work. Not everyone is created equal, and not everyone deserves to be treated equally. Uhh, I can't think of too terribly much against socialism ^_^
Posted by: illmortal Mar 26 2009, 03:05 PM
How would you define, "fair distribution of wealth", NoSex?
Posted by: mipadi Mar 26 2009, 04:56 PM
When viewed in the context of the development of societies and civilizations, capitalism runs contrary to the goals of such institutions. In capitalism, the individual is seen as the key to his own success; i.e., economic prosperity depends on the will of the individual to "work hard". But the whole motivation behind forming societies was to allow people to work together, with their own individual strengths and weaknesses, for the greater good of everyone involved -- rather than just fighting "in the jungle" over limited resources. In essence, this was a socialist system.
In light of this, capitalism feels like a return to the jungle out of which we labored so hard to climb.
Posted by: NoSex Mar 26 2009, 05:38 PM
QUOTE(kryogenix @ Mar 26 2009, 01:05 PM) 
But let's see. Socialism is a system that's bound to be taken advantage of by lazy individuals. They'll take the fair distribution of wealth and they'll not put in their fair share of work. Not everyone is created equal, and not everyone deserves to be treated equally. Uhh, I can't think of too terribly much against socialism ^_^
in my conception of a socialistic state, those individuals that choose not to work will be provided only what is owned most publicly (i.e. rations, shelter, the necessities). those who choose to work will be rewarded with "free" incomes, of which thing can do as they please (i.e. luxury & consumer goods).
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 26 2009, 02:05 PM)
How would you define, "fair distribution of wealth", NoSex?
those who do the most work, causing themselves the most stress, obtain the most wealth. the distribution of wealth, ideally, would be much closer to equal, but not necessarily equal. essentially, a small percentage of the population would no longer hold a majority of wealth, while most of the wealth would belong to a large working class.
QUOTE(mipadi @ Mar 26 2009, 03:56 PM)
In light of this, capitalism feels like a return to out of which jungle we labored so hard to climb.
that's a great perspective! bravo! i'll have to use this analogy sometime.
Posted by: mipadi Mar 26 2009, 06:52 PM
QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 26 2009, 06:38 PM)
that's a great perspective! bravo! i'll have to use this analogy sometime.
Shame I f*cked up my own copy editing. If you use the analogy, you'll probably want to phrase it in a more grammatically-correct manner.
Posted by: NoSex Mar 26 2009, 07:24 PM
QUOTE(mipadi @ Mar 26 2009, 05:52 PM)
Shame I f*cked up my own copy editing.
no big. ahahha.
Posted by: heartquasm Mar 27 2009, 02:03 AM
QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 26 2009, 02:45 PM)
i view capitalism as a mode of economic & social infancy. i think that it is regressive to society, poisonous, & under-developing.
i point to these basic "flaws" in capitalism*:
1. the emphasis on profit as opposed to utility.
2. the creation of oligarchy & plutocracy.
3. the unfair/uneven distribution of wealth.
4. the creation of a significant class divide.
5. the inability of capitalism, alone, to provide the people with necessities.
6. the exploitation of the working class.
7. the existence of crime in excess, caused by class struggle, poverty, & proletariat anxiety.
8. the creation of an oppressive institution (i.e. the police state, the church, the education system) in order to secure profits to a specific & elite population.
i point to these basic "flaws" in capitalism*:
1. the emphasis on profit as opposed to utility.
2. the creation of oligarchy & plutocracy.
3. the unfair/uneven distribution of wealth.
4. the creation of a significant class divide.
5. the inability of capitalism, alone, to provide the people with necessities.
6. the exploitation of the working class.
7. the existence of crime in excess, caused by class struggle, poverty, & proletariat anxiety.
8. the creation of an oppressive institution (i.e. the police state, the church, the education system) in order to secure profits to a specific & elite population.
why hello karl marx.
contemporary civ class is discussing marx right now. bookmarking this and coming back to it after finishing his critique on capitalism and writing a 10 page essay comparing marx to hegel. -_-
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 09:17 AM
Socialism looks great on paper, but history has shown us it doesn't work. Unfortunately it's marred by the corrupt leaders of government looking out for their best interest rather than the interests of their people. Not only that, individuals take advantage of the socialist system and those who work hard aren't rewarded for their efforts. Eventually those who work hard submit to the laziness of their neighbors because there is no reward to their efforts and the country slowly suffers as a whole as average citizen becomes more and more of a burden to its society. This system has been tried several times, and each time it has been met with failure in comparison to our semi-capitalist government. What makes anyone think it will succeed?
Capitalism isn't controlled by any one person or group of people. This is, in part, why it's so much more successful than socialism. It gives everyone the potential to become the best that he or she can become. Capitalism puts the responsibility of their well being on the individual. That said, capitalism doesn't provide for a person, but people provide for themselves. Every person is born equal, but no-one will have equal outcomes.
Posted by: mipadi Mar 27 2009, 09:35 AM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 10:17 AM)
Socialism looks great on paper, but it doesn't work. Unfortunately it's marred by the corrupt leaders of government looking out for their best interest rather than the interests of their people. Not only that, individuals take advantage of the socialist system and those who work hard aren't rewarded for their efforts. Eventually those who work hard submit to the laziness of their neighbors because there is no reward to their efforts and the country suffers as a whole.
Capitalism looks great on paper, but it does't work. Unfortunately, it's marred by the corrupt leaders of government looking out for their own best interest rather than the interests of their people. Not only that, individuals take advantage of the capitalist system and those who work hard aren't rewarded for their efforts. Eventually those who work hard submit to the laziness of their neighbors because there is no reward to their efforts and the country suffers as a whole.
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 09:56 AM
I think the only person able to be a great and successful socialist would have to be Jesus (pbuh) himself.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 10:05 AM
i duno, i mean i know a ton of people who work hard and capitalism hasn't given them anything for it. it's not like everyone has even close to an equal chance to succeed, because for example, people with more financial resources have a HUGE leg up. i don't see how every person is born equal in capitalism...
plenty of people weren't born equal with me
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 10:10 AM
QUOTE(mipadi @ Mar 27 2009, 10:35 AM)
Capitalism looks great on paper, but it does't work. Unfortunately, it's marred by the corrupt leaders of government looking out for their own best interest rather than the interests of their people. Not only that, individuals take advantage of the capitalist system and those who work hard aren't rewarded for their efforts. Eventually those who work hard submit to the laziness of their neighbors because there is no reward to their efforts and the country suffers as a whole.
Capitalism is largely marred when gov't attempts to implement socialist policies on the business world. For example, the affordable housing “mission” that the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were charged with fulfilling.
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 10:56 AM)
I think the only person able to be a great and successful socialist would have to be Jesus (pbuh) himself.
Only because he's considered to be perfect, blameless, and selfless.
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 11:05 AM)
i duno, i mean i know a ton of people who work hard and capitalism hasn't given them anything for it. it's not like everyone has even close to an equal chance to succeed, because for example, people with more financial resources have a HUGE leg up. i don't see how every person is born equal in capitalism...
plenty of people weren't born equal with me
plenty of people weren't born equal with me
Everyone's born with equal rights.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 10:14 AM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 10:10 AM)
Everyone's born with equal rights.
but not an equal chance, oh ok.
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 10:20 AM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 11:10 AM)
Only because he's considered to be perfect, blameless, and selfless.
Exactly.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 10:26 AM
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 11:14 AM)
but not an equal chance, oh ok.
You do have an equal chance. You're born into a world full of infinite possibilities. My god, Obama is living proof of that. Here's a man with interracial parents, his father passed away, he admits he did drugs as a child, and now he's the president.
Do you believe it's unfair for one family to make wise investments or start a business while the next generation reaps the benefits of it? You have the option to do the same. Your families previous generation had the option to do the same. While you may have to struggle at first, you can do it. Everyone is born with the potential to do great things. In a socialist system our potential is squashed by our government.
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 11:20 AM)
Exactly.
For once we agree on something!! YES!!!
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 10:57 AM
Obama is a puppet...
Anyways, Socialism in my opinion is the perfect political and economic system. But it is nearly impossible to have this form of utopia because humans are simply fallible, thus making it hard for socialism to exist in its' purity.
The one thing that bugs me the most is when people simply associate Socialism with Karl Marx. That's Marxism. Not Socialism in its' pure form. Study all the ancient tribes and their "governing" system and you'll discover that majority of the ancients all lived in socialized government.
People also make the mistake of associating socialism with communism. This is also a grave mistake. Some people need to watch the documentaries on Hugo Chavez so they can get a good idea of how Socialism works in real life. Even though Hugo isn't exactly the best candidate, at least he follows the core principles of a socialized nation.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 11:15 AM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 11:57 AM)
Obama is a puppet...
Anyways, Socialism in my opinion is the perfect political and economic system. But it is nearly impossible to have this form of utopia because humans are simply fallible, thus making it hard for socialism to exist in its' purity.
The one thing that bugs me the most is when people simply associate Socialism with Karl Marx. That's Marxism. Not Socialism in its' pure form. Study all the ancient tribes and their "governing" system and you'll discover that majority of the ancients all lived in socialized government.
People also make the mistake of associating socialism with communism. This is also a grave mistake. Some people need to watch the documentaries on Hugo Chavez so they can get a good idea of how Socialism works in real life. Even though Hugo isn't exactly the best candidate, at least he follows the core principles of a socialized nation.
Anyways, Socialism in my opinion is the perfect political and economic system. But it is nearly impossible to have this form of utopia because humans are simply fallible, thus making it hard for socialism to exist in its' purity.
The one thing that bugs me the most is when people simply associate Socialism with Karl Marx. That's Marxism. Not Socialism in its' pure form. Study all the ancient tribes and their "governing" system and you'll discover that majority of the ancients all lived in socialized government.
People also make the mistake of associating socialism with communism. This is also a grave mistake. Some people need to watch the documentaries on Hugo Chavez so they can get a good idea of how Socialism works in real life. Even though Hugo isn't exactly the best candidate, at least he follows the core principles of a socialized nation.
I completely agree. Every president is a puppet. Socialism is awesome but a failed system because humans are selfish. One thing you don't mention is that we wouldn't need socialism if humans were perfect. If everyone was indeed selfless and good then we wouldn't need government at all. Things would simply work.
Capitalism works because it's not governed by people. While it has it's flaws, it works because no-one is in control of it. Individuals are in control of their own future, and the out come of their lives is based upon the decisions that they make.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 01:02 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 10:26 AM)
You do have an equal chance. You're born into a world full of infinite possibilities. My god, Obama is living proof of that. Here's a man with interracial parents, his father passed away, he admits he did drugs as a child, and now he's the president.
Do you believe it's unfair for one family to make wise investments or start a business while the next generation reaps the benefits of it? You have the option to do the same. Your families previous generation had the option to do the same. While you may have to struggle at first, you can do it. Everyone is born with the potential to do great things. In a socialist system our potential is squashed by our government.
Do you believe it's unfair for one family to make wise investments or start a business while the next generation reaps the benefits of it? You have the option to do the same. Your families previous generation had the option to do the same. While you may have to struggle at first, you can do it. Everyone is born with the potential to do great things. In a socialist system our potential is squashed by our government.
no, i'm not saying it can't be done. i'm black and my family is upper middle class, obviously it's not impossible or else we couldn't have gone from being slaves to being upper middle class now. but i think pretending like if you work hard and struggle then it will all work out is wrong. i don't think that simply putting in some hard work is going to get people out of poverty. i think that's under-judging how difficult it is to get out of the cycle of poverty.
there's people who i know, and i just don't see a way out for them. i'm not saying it's impossible, but i just don't really see how it's realistic. to get out of the lower class, you need a job that isn't lower class to begin with. i don't really get how they can even get to the point of getting a middle class job, because they don't have the education. they're competing with people who already have a huge advantage. how do you get the education when you can't afford it? people say how "oh, well you can work hard in school and get scholarships!". well i don't buy that either. because some schools completely suck and are way underfunded and they can't even provide the level of education you need to be in the running for half the scholarships. then people are like "well that's the parents responsibility to work hard to get their kids into a decent school so they can succeed!". but i don't buy that either, because going to another district where the school is better in a lot of cases means you have to move. but you can't move there because you can't afford to live there in the first place. if they could afford to live somewhere other than a poor, crime invested area then they already would be.
i mean i'm pretty big on the whole "your education is what you make it" stance, and i think getting educated is partly peoples own responsibility not solely a school. i have parents who were educated though who could help me...if you're parents are in the same cycle as you then how are they supposed to help you? the same shit happened to them and they couldn't get a education because they couldn't afford to live in the area with the better schools either. it just keeps repeating over and over. i mean there's a billion more elements to it but you get the idea.
plus, working hard i don't think is going to necessarily bring you anything now. my grandparents worked hard and as a result of that we're living ok now. working hard didn't make them not dirt poor then. it helped on down the line.
i'm not against capitalism or for socialism. i just think people under exaggerate how many odds are against someone who's trying to get out of a poverty cycle. i don't think just working hard is enough sometimes. people don't have even close to an equal chance to reach their potential i don't think.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 01:42 PM
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 02:02 PM)
no, i'm not saying it can't be done. i'm black and my family is upper middle class, obviously it's not impossible or else we couldn't have gone from being slaves to being upper middle class now. but i think pretending like if you work hard and struggle then it will all work out is wrong. i don't think that simply putting in some hard work is going to get people out of poverty. i think that's under-judging how difficult it is to get out of the cycle of poverty.
there's people who i know, and i just don't see a way out for them. i'm not saying it's impossible, but i just don't really see how it's realistic. to get out of the lower class, you need a job that isn't lower class to begin with. i don't really get how they can even get to the point of getting a middle class job, because they don't have the education. they're competing with people who already have a huge advantage. how do you get the education when you can't afford it? people say how "oh, well you can work hard in school and get scholarships!". well i don't buy that either. because some schools completely suck and are way underfunded and they can't even provide the level of education you need to be in the running for half the scholarships. then people are like "well that's the parents responsibility to work hard to get their kids into a decent school so they can succeed!". but i don't buy that either, because going to another district where the school is better in a lot of cases means you have to move. but you can't move there because you can't afford to live there in the first place. if they could afford to live somewhere other than a poor, crime invested area then they already would be.
i mean i'm pretty big on the whole "your education is what you make it" stance, and i think getting educated is partly peoples own responsibility not solely a school. i have parents who were educated though who could help me...if you're parents are in the same cycle as you then how are they supposed to help you? the same shit happened to them and they couldn't get a education because they couldn't afford to live in the area with the better schools either. it just keeps repeating over and over. i mean there's a billion more elements to it but you get the idea.
plus, working hard i don't think is going to necessarily bring you anything now. my grandparents worked hard and as a result of that we're living ok now. working hard didn't make them not dirt poor then. it helped on down the line.
i'm not against capitalism or for socialism. i just think people under exaggerate how many odds are against someone who's trying to get out of a poverty cycle. i don't think just working hard is enough sometimes. people don't have even close to an equal chance to reach their potential i don't think.
there's people who i know, and i just don't see a way out for them. i'm not saying it's impossible, but i just don't really see how it's realistic. to get out of the lower class, you need a job that isn't lower class to begin with. i don't really get how they can even get to the point of getting a middle class job, because they don't have the education. they're competing with people who already have a huge advantage. how do you get the education when you can't afford it? people say how "oh, well you can work hard in school and get scholarships!". well i don't buy that either. because some schools completely suck and are way underfunded and they can't even provide the level of education you need to be in the running for half the scholarships. then people are like "well that's the parents responsibility to work hard to get their kids into a decent school so they can succeed!". but i don't buy that either, because going to another district where the school is better in a lot of cases means you have to move. but you can't move there because you can't afford to live there in the first place. if they could afford to live somewhere other than a poor, crime invested area then they already would be.
i mean i'm pretty big on the whole "your education is what you make it" stance, and i think getting educated is partly peoples own responsibility not solely a school. i have parents who were educated though who could help me...if you're parents are in the same cycle as you then how are they supposed to help you? the same shit happened to them and they couldn't get a education because they couldn't afford to live in the area with the better schools either. it just keeps repeating over and over. i mean there's a billion more elements to it but you get the idea.
plus, working hard i don't think is going to necessarily bring you anything now. my grandparents worked hard and as a result of that we're living ok now. working hard didn't make them not dirt poor then. it helped on down the line.
i'm not against capitalism or for socialism. i just think people under exaggerate how many odds are against someone who's trying to get out of a poverty cycle. i don't think just working hard is enough sometimes. people don't have even close to an equal chance to reach their potential i don't think.
I don't believe I'm "under-exaggerating" anything. I simply stated that it was "difficult" to avoid the long and tedious task of typing out each and every possibility that these people who are in a poverty cycle face. There are many odds against someone in the poverty cycle, but in the end it's up to the individual to change that cycle. In capitalism you're given the opportunity to make the best of your life or waste it, and if you want to waste your life by doing drugs, not educating yourself, etc... then the future generations of your family will probably feel the effects of your choices. I don't feel that society should have to pay for this.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 01:51 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 01:42 PM)
There are many odds against someone in the poverty cycle, but in the end it's up to the individual to change that cycle. In capitalism you're given the opportunity to make the best of your life or waste it, and if you want to waste your life by doing drugs, not educating yourself, etc... then the future generations of your family will probably feel the effects of your choices. I don't feel that society should have to pay for this.
but what if they didn't do this to themselves? what if no one made bad decisions like doing drugs or something? what if they just worked (hard) at wherever they could find a job, and got whatever education they could afford. they just haven't been able to move up doing that because that's not really enough to move up and they can't get out of the cycle long enough to be able to move up. it just repeats one generation after another.
i don't think it is always that they made a shitty decision somewhere down the line like doing drugs, just like i don't think it's always their fault they don't have the best education. i don't think it's always their "choice" to get a not up to par education.
shrugs, i just don't think working hard always gets you out. it's too much more complex than just going to work. i wish that was the case though.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 02:04 PM
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 02:51 PM)
but what if they didn't do this to themselves? what if no one made bad decisions like doing drugs or something? what if they just worked (hard) at wherever they could find a job, and got whatever education they could afford. they just haven't been able to move up doing that because that's not really enough to move up and they can't get out of the cycle long enough to be able to move up. it just repeats one generation after another.
i don't think it is always that they made a shitty decision somewhere down the line like doing drugs, just like i don't think it's always their fault they don't have the best education.
i don't think it is always that they made a shitty decision somewhere down the line like doing drugs, just like i don't think it's always their fault they don't have the best education.
You mean, what if life just took a shit on them? Everything that ever happened to them their life was a series of unfortunate events and there was just nothing they could do about anything? Although it's a rare case, and we certainly feel bad for hardworking people like this who are simply fucked by life. Do you think that either socialism or capitalism could help in that scenario? No system of gov't account for every scenario that presents itself.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Mar 27 2009, 02:08 PM
litt robb ppll...
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 02:08 PM
shrugs, i'm just thinking of people who have been f*cked since day one. like minorities who got thrown into poverty and are still trying to figure out how to get out. how to get educated when you're stuck somewhere with shitty schools. how to get a college education so you can get a better job when you're family needs you to go to work asap so you can buy food.
i don't get how people are always supposed to find time to get ahead while they're trying to just get by.
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 02:12 PM
Blame welfare. It makes people lazy and expect hand outs.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 02:15 PM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 02:12 PM)
Blame welfare. It makes people lazy and expect hand outs.
is that supposed to be a reply to what i just said...becuase i don't get how that's even relevant to people who work hard everyday to get by but can't get ahead in the world.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 02:17 PM
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 03:08 PM)
shrugs, i'm just thinking of people who have been f*cked since day one. like minorities who got thrown into poverty and are still trying to figure out how to get out. how to get educated when you're stuck somewhere with shitty schools. how to get a college education so you can get a better job when you're family needs you to go to work asap so you can buy food.
i don't get how people are always supposed to find time to get ahead while they're trying to just get by.
i don't get how people are always supposed to find time to get ahead while they're trying to just get by.
Like the slaves? How far are you going back. Are you talking about immigrants? What minorities are being thrown into poverty now? I thought myself in public school because the education sucked there. If I hadn't taken that initiative then I would've been stupid just like the rest of the kids in my class. Maybe the first step these people should take is to get away from what's dragging them down... their family.
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 03:12 PM)
Blame welfare. It makes people lazy and expect hand outs.
This is a good point, systems like welfare prolong the poverty cycle for those that abuse it.
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 03:15 PM)
is that supposed to be a reply to what i just said...becuase i don't get how that's even relevant to people who work hard everyday to get by but can't get ahead in the world.
Do you honestly believe those people who are on welfare think they're lazy. Of course they're not lazy. They're "always" looking for a job. They just "can't" do anything without the help of the gov't. They make the people who work hard and get screwed look like they're crying wolf.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 02:21 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 02:17 PM)
Like the slaves? How far are you going back. Are you talking about immigrants? What minorities are being thrown into poverty now? I thought myself in public school because the education sucked there. If I hadn't taken that initiative then I would've been stupid just like the rest of the kids in my class. Maybe the first step these people should take is to get away from what's dragging them down... their family.
how do kids get away from their family? just up and leave and start going to a good school in a good community?
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 02:17 PM)
Do you honestly believe those people who are on welfare think they're lazy. Of course they're not lazy. They're "always" looking for a job. They just "can't" do anything without the help of the gov't. They make the people who work hard and get screwed look like they're crying wolf.
but i'm not even talking about people who abuse welfare, or drugs, or any of the rest of this. i'm talking about people who go to work everyday to try to have something to eat and somewhere to sleep. you're not even addressing what i'm talking about because i've never once this whole debate been talking about people WITHOUT job.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 02:27 PM
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 03:21 PM)
but i'm not even talking about people who abuse welfare, or drugs, or any of the rest of this. i'm talking about people who go to work everyday to try to have something to eat and somewhere to sleep. you're not even addressing what i'm talking about because i've never once this whole debate been talking about people WITHOUT job.
I have never seen anyone who's single, has a stable job, works every day, yet cannot get by.
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 02:27 PM
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 03:15 PM)
is that supposed to be a reply to what i just said...becuase i don't get how that's even relevant to people who work hard everyday to get by but can't get ahead in the world.
A child whose parents are on welfare will more than likely be the ones to suffer the consequences. It causes all sorts of horrible trends.
Welfare doesn't pay someone enough to fully cover for their child's well being. In both health and education. Thus putting more strain on the child as they grow older who have more and more needs.
Minimum wage should be rid of. That's just as bad as welfare. Lets be realistic.. minimum wage is more for kids during summer... little 14/15 year olds. Not for adults who have actual bills. Minimum wage couldn't even cover mortgage, much less health insurance, dental insurance, vision insurance, vehicular insurance, life insurance, home insurance, 401k, etc... minimum wage is useless and it's part of the problem in this country.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 02:30 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 02:27 PM)
I have never seen anyone who's single, has a stable job, works every day, yet cannot get by.
yeah but getting by isn't getting ahead. just because you can get by in the lower class doesn't mean you're hard work is ever going to get you out of lower class. that's what i'm saying.
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 02:27 PM)
Minimum wage should be rid of. That's just as bad as welfare. Lets be realistic.. minimum wage is more for kids during summer... little 14/15 year olds. Not for adults who have actual bills. Minimum wage couldn't even cover mortgage, much less health insurance, dental insurance, vision insurance, vehicular insurance, life insurance, home insurance, 401k, etc... minimum wage is useless and it's part of the problem in this country.
i agree
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 02:54 PM
QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 27 2009, 03:30 PM)
yeah but getting by isn't getting ahead. just because you can get by in the lower class doesn't mean you're hard work is ever going to get you out of lower class. that's what i'm saying.
i agree
i agree
Simple hard work will never get you out of that cycle... you have to educate yourself and make decisions that will further your career. When I say hard work I don't mean, "Hard work some other random minimum wage job". They still have the option to educate themselves. Again, I was summing it all up as hard work.
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 03:27 PM)
Minimum wage should be rid of. That's just as bad as welfare. Lets be realistic.. minimum wage is more for kids during summer... little 14/15 year olds. Not for adults who have actual bills. Minimum wage couldn't even cover mortgage, much less health insurance, dental insurance, vision insurance, vehicular insurance, life insurance, home insurance, 401k, etc... minimum wage is useless and it's part of the problem in this country.
If you were to remove minimum wage then businesses would be able to take advantage of their employees. Someone who works a minimum wage job for 40 hours a week can get by paying rent/bills.
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 03:41 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 03:54 PM)
Simple hard work will never get you out of that cycle... you have to educate yourself and make decisions that will further your career. When I say hard work I don't mean, "Hard work some other random minimum wage job". They still have the option to educate themselves. Again, I was summing it all up as hard work.
If you were to remove minimum wage then businesses would be able to take advantage of their employees. Someone who works a minimum wage job for 40 hours a week can get by paying rent/bills.
If you were to remove minimum wage then businesses would be able to take advantage of their employees. Someone who works a minimum wage job for 40 hours a week can get by paying rent/bills.
lol no they wouldn't.
Florida, minimum wage is $7.21
$7.21 x 40 = $288.40
$288.40 x 4 = 1153.60
lol... I make that much in a week (a lil less actually). And no way in hell can I afford my mortgage, electricity, cell phone bill, internet, satellite tv, car insurance, health insurance, life insurance, 401k, vision insurance, dental insurance, groceries etc... with what I make.
I STRONGLY doubt someone making minimum wage can afford to live by themselves, paying rent, electricity, car insurance, and other bills combined each month. It is impossible.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Mar 27 2009, 03:42 PM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 03:41 PM)
I STRONGLY doubt someone making minimum wage can afford to live by themselves, paying rent, electricity, car insurance, and other bills combined each month. It is impossible.
for real. i duno how people can.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 04:23 PM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 04:41 PM)
lol no they wouldn't.
Florida, minimum wage is $7.21
$7.21 x 40 = $288.40
$288.40 x 4 = 1153.60
lol... I make that much in a week (a lil less actually). And no way in hell can I afford my mortgage, electricity, cell phone bill, internet, satellite tv, car insurance, health insurance, life insurance, 401k, vision insurance, dental insurance, groceries etc... with what I make.
I STRONGLY doubt someone making minimum wage can afford to live by themselves, paying rent, electricity, car insurance, and other bills combined each month. It is impossible.
Florida, minimum wage is $7.21
$7.21 x 40 = $288.40
$288.40 x 4 = 1153.60
lol... I make that much in a week (a lil less actually). And no way in hell can I afford my mortgage, electricity, cell phone bill, internet, satellite tv, car insurance, health insurance, life insurance, 401k, vision insurance, dental insurance, groceries etc... with what I make.
I STRONGLY doubt someone making minimum wage can afford to live by themselves, paying rent, electricity, car insurance, and other bills combined each month. It is impossible.
That's just it, you wouldn't have a mortgage, car insurance, cellphone bill, vision insurance, satellite tv, or dental insurance with those wages.
With 1153.60 you would have a 1 bedroom apartment for about $450 a month, $200 a month for heat and electric for one person, and $200 dollars a month for groceries for one person. That leaves us with 303.60, but wait we have to pay a shit ton of money for taxes. So, since this individual has claimed himself as a dependent we drop that to about $150.00 left over.
Posted by: mipadi Mar 27 2009, 04:31 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 05:23 PM)
That's just it, you wouldn't have a mortgage, car insurance, cellphone bill, vision insurance, satellite tv, or dental insurance with those wages.
With 1153.60 you would have a 1 bedroom apartment for about $450 a month, $200 a month for heat and electric for one person, and $200 dollars a month for groceries for one person. That leaves us with 303.60, but wait we have to pay a shit ton of money for taxes. So, since this individual has claimed himself as a dependent we drop that to about $150.00 left over.
With 1153.60 you would have a 1 bedroom apartment for about $450 a month, $200 a month for heat and electric for one person, and $200 dollars a month for groceries for one person. That leaves us with 303.60, but wait we have to pay a shit ton of money for taxes. So, since this individual has claimed himself as a dependent we drop that to about $150.00 left over.
You're missing, and underestimating, a bunch of expenses.
For example, I don't live in a pricey area, but $200 alone wouldn't cover food. I probably spend $275 a month on food. That includes going out once or twice, but I'm also not exactly eating steak and lobster every night. Sometimes I only eat once or twice a day, too. I could maybe trim it to $250, but that'd be stretching it.
Car insurance, for some people, is practically a necessity, too. Not every place has an easy access to mass transit, and a lot of people can't get to work without a car. As for health insurance, most minimum-wage jobs don't offer health insurance, so you either (a) have to get it on your own (another cost), or (b) not get sick. (b) is a pretty pricey option if you do have the misfortune of falling ill, or even getting hit by a car or something like that.
You also left out things like water bills and gas bills. Okay, sometimes rent covers water, and not everyone has gas, but these are additional expenses for some people. For example, my rent doesn't cover water or gas, so if I want to have a hot shower, I have to pay for that, too.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 04:46 PM
QUOTE(mipadi @ Mar 27 2009, 05:31 PM)
You're missing, and underestimating, a bunch of expenses.
For example, I don't live in a pricey area, but $200 alone wouldn't cover food. I probably spend $275 a month on food. That includes going out once or twice, but I'm also not exactly eating steak and lobster every night. Sometimes I only eat once or twice a day, too. I could maybe trim it to $250, but that'd be stretching it.
Car insurance, for some people, is practically a necessity, too. Not every place has an easy access to mass transit, and a lot of people can't get to work without a car. As for health insurance, most minimum-wage jobs don't offer health insurance, so you either (a) have to get it on your own (another cost), or (b) not get sick. (b) is a pretty pricey option if you do have the misfortune of falling ill, or even getting hit by a car or something like that.
You also left out things like water bills and gas bills. Okay, sometimes rent covers water, and not everyone has gas, but these are additional expenses for some people. For example, my rent doesn't cover water or gas, so if I want to have a hot shower, I have to pay for that, too.
For example, I don't live in a pricey area, but $200 alone wouldn't cover food. I probably spend $275 a month on food. That includes going out once or twice, but I'm also not exactly eating steak and lobster every night. Sometimes I only eat once or twice a day, too. I could maybe trim it to $250, but that'd be stretching it.
Car insurance, for some people, is practically a necessity, too. Not every place has an easy access to mass transit, and a lot of people can't get to work without a car. As for health insurance, most minimum-wage jobs don't offer health insurance, so you either (a) have to get it on your own (another cost), or (b) not get sick. (b) is a pretty pricey option if you do have the misfortune of falling ill, or even getting hit by a car or something like that.
You also left out things like water bills and gas bills. Okay, sometimes rent covers water, and not everyone has gas, but these are additional expenses for some people. For example, my rent doesn't cover water or gas, so if I want to have a hot shower, I have to pay for that, too.
Ok, so we'll bring it to 250. I spend about 200 dollars on food each week on my own. I don't believe it would be stretching it if they watched what they purchased the same way I do. They're left with 100 dollars for the month. Health insurance is off, this person doesn't make enough for that. They need to get a phone so -$20 a month for vonage. Cars are a luxury when you're on minimum wage.You need a job that pays more before that happens. Car is off limits. Now we're down to 80 dollars left over...
$135.51 <- traditional monthly health insurance from ehealthinsurance.com for me. So, if we give Joe health insurance he has:
-75.51 per month
It's still hard to believe that this person is so pathetic that they cannot do anything but work a minimum wage jobs to make a living. Looks like Joe will have to work at 2 McDonald's locations before he can get out of the rut. Maybe a 60 hour work week at two minimum wage jobs will help. It will give him about 400 extra dollars a month after taxes. So he can have 325.00 a month to save.
Posted by: mipadi Mar 27 2009, 04:50 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 05:46 PM)
Ok, so we'll bring it to 250. I spend about 200 dollars on food each week on my own. I don't believe it would be stretching it if they watched what they purchased the same way I do. They're left with 100 dollars for the month. Health insurance is off, this person doesn't make enough for that. They need to get a phone so -$20 a month for vonage. Cars are a luxury when you're on minimum wage.You need a job that pays more before that happens. Car is off limits. Now we're down to 80 dollars left over...
A car is not a luxury. If you can't get to work, you can't get paid, and in many areas, mass transit is simply not an option. I don't think health insurance can be discredited so easily, either -- if you get sick or injured, you either need insurance, or you need to pay bills yourself. Either way is expensive; what's more costly, though?
I think it's pretty callous of you to suggest that someone working a minimum-wage job should either not get sick or injured, or foot the bill themselves.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 04:53 PM
QUOTE(mipadi @ Mar 27 2009, 05:50 PM)
A car is not a luxury. If you can't get to work, you can't get paid, and in many areas, mass transit is simply not an option. I don't think health insurance can be discredited so easily, either -- if you get sick or injured, you either need insurance, or you need to pay bills yourself. Either way is expensive; what's more costly, though?
I think it's pretty callous of you to suggest that someone working a minimum-wage job should either not get sick or injured, or foot the bill themselves.
I think it's pretty callous of you to suggest that someone working a minimum-wage job should either not get sick or injured, or foot the bill themselves.
It's not me brotha' it's life. He's trying to survive. I added health insurance to the plan, however he'll have to work 60 hours a week. Joe can ride the bicycle to work because he works in the city. He moved there to support his life style because he couldn't survive the rocky mountains. He is saving 325.00 a month while working 60 hours a week.
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 05:03 PM
Dood... Uronacid, in order for someone to live by themselves with that sort of wage... they couldn't even own a car, no cell phone, no fast food, nor any form of entertainment. They would work just to pay rent (no where in South Florida can you find an apartment for $400 or even $500 a month), electricity, groceries (barely any groceries at that), and possibly cable.
Forget owning a car, forget saving money, forget owning a cell phone, forget buying new things such as clothes, jewelry, fragrances, shoes etc.. I could never work just to pay bills.. I would feel like a slave!
Minimum wage, like I said earlier, is more for highschool kids, possibly college students. It is not meant for an adult who has or wants to have a normal enjoying life. Minimum wage is straight slave labor money.
Just to give an idea on just groceries a lone. I live with my lady and between me and her our groceries easily hit $300+ a month. Granted we do bulk shopping so that we save money... if we were to buy as much food at a normal grocery store we'd be spending more like $450 a month.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 05:06 PM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 06:03 PM)
Dood... Uronacid, in order for someone to live by themselves with that sort of wage... they couldn't even own a car, no cell phone, no fast food, nor any form of entertainment. They would work just to pay rent (no where in South Florida can you find an apartment for $400 or even $500 a month), electricity, groceries (barely any groceries at that), and possibly cable.
Forget owning a car, forget saving money, forget owning a cell phone, forget buying new things such as clothes, jewelry, fragrances, shoes etc.. I could never work just to pay bills.. I would feel like a slave!
Forget owning a car, forget saving money, forget owning a cell phone, forget buying new things such as clothes, jewelry, fragrances, shoes etc.. I could never work just to pay bills.. I would feel like a slave!
You can find a 1 bedroom apartment in NY(upstate) for 450 a month. You can do it in Florida.
Joe works out for fun. He's a real brute. Also, with that $350 he is saving each month he has decided to invest in a PS3 because he heard from his friends that he could install linux and steal his neighbors internet. He hopes to obtain new skills from his new found hobby and hopefully find a new job. No-one wants to live like this, Joe is doing it to survive and he's very offended by your slave comment. After all, this is what he needs to do.
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 05:19 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 06:06 PM)
You can find a 1 bedroom apartment in NY(upstate) for 450 a month. You can do it in Florida.
Joe works out for fun. He's a real brute. Also, with that $350 he is saving each month he has decided to invest in a PS3 because he heard from his friends that he could install linux and steal his neighbors internet. He hopes to obtain new skills from his new found hobby and hopefully find a new job.
Joe works out for fun. He's a real brute. Also, with that $350 he is saving each month he has decided to invest in a PS3 because he heard from his friends that he could install linux and steal his neighbors internet. He hopes to obtain new skills from his new found hobby and hopefully find a new job.
lol what? In New York? No. Definitely not... I know a shit load of people who even got a studio and that was pushing nearly $700 a month. And even so... do know how what kind of taxes are in New York? What if you're a smoker? A pack of New Ports in NY costs $9.50... here in South Florida, it just raised about another dollar and now costs $4.75-ish.
Meh nevermind... you probably live with mom and dad and don't understand the reality of minimum wage when tryin to have a life.
What's with the Joe story? And you don't have to install Linux to steal someone's wireless connection on your PS3..
Oh I get it... Joe should use his brain and get an education. That way he can stop being another corporate slave.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 05:24 PM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 06:19 PM)
Meh nevermind... you probably live with mom and dad and don't understand the reality of minimum wage when tryin to have a life.
That's not true. I own an inner-city two family house, and I'm a land lord. I'm also a network admin just like you. I have an $850.00 a month mortgage. I feel you don't worry. :)
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 06:19 PM)
What's with the Joe story? And you don't have to install Linux to steal someone's wireless connection on your PS3..
He doesn't know that yet, but he will soon find out.
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 06:19 PM)
Joe should use his brain and get an education. That way he can stop being another corporate slave.
What did you say? lol
Posted by: illmortal Mar 27 2009, 05:34 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 06:24 PM)
That's not true. I own an inner-city two family house, and I'm a land lord. I'm also a network admin just like you. I have an $850.00 a month mortgage. I feel you don't worry. :)
Great I pay $1,320 a month on my mortgage.
And no offense, I'm not just a network admin. Technically I'm a Systems Engineer.
Uronacid... why are you now starting to troll after refusing to acknowledge the reality of life as a grown up?
Is it too hard to understand that an education is required majority of the time in order to succeed in life? The only other way of succeeding in life is by being born into a multimillionaire family. Or marrying into a rich family.
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 27 2009, 05:41 PM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 06:34 PM)
Great I pay $1,320 a month on my mortgage.
And no offense, I'm not just a network admin. Technically I'm a Systems Engineer.
Uronacid... why are you now starting to troll after refusing to acknowledge the reality of life as a grown up?
Is it too hard to understand that an education is required majority of the time in order to succeed in life? The only other way of succeeding in life is by being born into a multimillionaire family. Or marrying into a rich family.
And no offense, I'm not just a network admin. Technically I'm a Systems Engineer.
Uronacid... why are you now starting to troll after refusing to acknowledge the reality of life as a grown up?
Is it too hard to understand that an education is required majority of the time in order to succeed in life? The only other way of succeeding in life is by being born into a multimillionaire family. Or marrying into a rich family.
Apologies, I didn't mean to troll your post. It was an attempt at being funny/sarcastic, however the internet masked that attempt. I was agreeing with you. You are correct. Education is a necessity. If you don't educate yourself then you will fail at life.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Mar 28 2009, 05:07 PM
oo.. ill blastoisee acttuullii staii mature dizz thrad... ^^ good fuu u..
URONACID... sounn lyke nosex n james..
dam REDNECK..
Posted by: NoSex Mar 28 2009, 10:34 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 12:42 PM)
In capitalism you're given the opportunity to make the best of your life or waste it
uhm. no. you're a dumb ignorant f*ck.
if you weren't born in your safe-white-suburban home, of course you wouldn't be saying anything like that.
the ghetto is a real & geographically divining power. if you are born into poverty, it is tremendously unlikely that you can rise out of destitution by mere will-power alone (that's given that "will-power to achieve" has been taught to you in the first place). you see, as white kids... we learned @ an early age the importance of education, office jobs, & rock & roll music. a lot of kids don't have that luxury (& yes, that is a luxury). try "learning yourself" when your school is pencil-less, your mother is sick (& can't afford health insurance) & can't work, so you have to pick up an after-school job that, eventually, turns into an other-than-school job, just so that you can feed yourself & your dying mother. where the f*ck is the time for "succeeding" in avoiding the drugs that are all around you, the violence outside your window (caused by class divide, & poverty), trying to get by, & not being able to attend a school (that is underfunded & sucks ass anyways)? like, don't you understand that poverty & failure is geographic & wealth & success is hereditary?
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 12:42 PM)
I don't feel that society should have to pay for this.
pay for what? the violence, crime, sickness, & social ills caused by a class struggle - caused by a government that doesn't provide the necessities of life for its people? a society is better if its parts (the people that make up a society) are happy & healthy. there is a reason people rob one another & fight & die... & it's not because they have everything they need & feel safe. maslow's hierarchy (of needs) much?
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 01:27 PM)
I have never seen anyone who's single, has a stable job, works every day, yet cannot get by.
then you a metric-f*ck-ton whiter than i could have ever imagined. not to mention stupid as f*ck... way to "educate yourself," dummy.
read "nickle & dimed" by barbara ehrenreich
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 01:54 PM)
They still have the option to educate themselves.
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 27 2009, 04:41 PM)
Education is a necessity. If you don't educate yourself then you will fail at life.
you realize someone needs to grow up in an environment that teaches that in order for it to actually happen? kids don't just succeed in school because they try their hardest & provide for themselves all of the proper equipment & motivation (needed) to succeed. they have to be taught by their environment to be good @ school, & be good @ being autodidactic. if you live in destitution, this sort of attitude (achievement oriented) is going to be very rare.
not to mention, no one gives a f*ck if you can do this or that... or know this or that... without a reputation & without a piece of paper (diploma) to demonstrate your aptitude, f*ck all to trying to get a job. & diplomas aren't f*cking cheap.
even if you can miraculously educate yourself... that doesn't mean you can do shit without a piece of paper that says you can "do shit."
QUOTE(PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH @ Mar 28 2009, 04:07 PM)
URONACID... sounn lyke nosex n james..
dam REDNECK..
dam REDNECK..
what the f*ck?! you're such a stupid mother f*cker. get the f*ck out.
p.s. did you two even read the first post of this thread? way to f*ck up!
Posted by: mipadi Mar 29 2009, 08:13 AM
QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 28 2009, 11:34 PM)
read "nickle & dimed" by barbara ehrenreich
I'm glad you brought this up, because I was going to mention this myself. I actually had the pleasure of meeting Ehrenreich last year -- she came to give a talk on these issues. Unlike most of the people posting in this thread (no offense, but it appears to be the truth), Ehrenreich did attempt to live in minimum-wage jobs for several months, and chronicled the "adventure" in her book. Let's just say she wasn't terribly successful.
I still assert the point, too, that the very idea of capitalism undermines the fabric of society. The whole point of humans forming societies was to share limited resources, instead of fighting over them. It's shocking that we've swung the other way and actually encourage Americans to compete with one another over resources, rather than just helping each other out so everyone's life can be a bit better.
I know there are practical reasons why socialist societies can become corrupt, but no one's presented compelling evidence that capitalist societies aren't just as corrupt.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Mar 29 2009, 01:37 PM
QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 28 2009, 11:34 PM)
what the f*ck?! you're such a stupid mother f*cker. get the f*ck out.
p.s. did you two even read the first post of this thread? way to f*ck up!
p.s. did you two even read the first post of this thread? way to f*ck up!
HAHAHA.. i call u out n BAM... u post huh..
chillax... moi hur da wattchh dat alll..
haha..
Posted by: Uronacid Mar 30 2009, 06:24 PM
QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 28 2009, 11:34 PM)
uhm. no. you're a dumb ignorant f*ck. if you weren't born in your safe-white-suburban home, of course you wouldn't be saying anything like that. the ghetto is a real & geographically divining power. if you are born into poverty, it is tremendously unlikely that you can rise out of destitution by mere will-power alone (that's given that "will-power to achieve" has been taught to you in the first place). you see, as white kids... we learned @ an early age the importance of education, office jobs, & rock & roll music. a lot of kids don't have that luxury (& yes, that is a luxury). try "learning yourself" when your school is pencil-less, your mother is sick (& can't afford health insurance) & can't work, so you have to pick up an after-school job that, eventually, turns into an other-than-school job, just so that you can feed yourself & your dying mother. where the f*ck is the time for "succeeding" in avoiding the drugs that are all around you, the violence outside your window (caused by class divide, & poverty), trying to get by, & not being able to attend a school (that is underfunded & sucks ass anyways)? like, don't you understand that poverty & failure is geographic & wealth & success is hereditary?
pay for what? the violence, crime, sickness, & social ills caused by a class struggle - caused by a government that doesn't provide the necessities of life for its people? a society is better if its parts (the people that make up a society) are happy & healthy. there is a reason people rob one another & fight & die... & it's not because they have everything they need & feel safe. maslow's hierarchy (of needs) much?
then you a metric-f*ck-ton whiter than i could have ever imagined. not to mention stupid as f*ck... way to "educate yourself," dummy.
read "nickle & dimed" by barbara ehrenreich
you realize someone needs to grow up in an environment that teaches that in order for it to actually happen? kids don't just succeed in school because they try their hardest & provide for themselves all of the proper equipment & motivation (needed) to succeed. they have to be taught by their environment to be good @ school, & be good @ being autodidactic. if you live in destitution, this sort of attitude (achievement oriented) is going to be very rare.
not to mention, no one gives a f*ck if you can do this or that... or know this or that... without a reputation & without a piece of paper (diploma) to demonstrate your aptitude, f*ck all to trying to get a job. & diplomas aren't f*cking cheap.
even if you can miraculously educate yourself... that doesn't mean you can do shit
pay for what? the violence, crime, sickness, & social ills caused by a class struggle - caused by a government that doesn't provide the necessities of life for its people? a society is better if its parts (the people that make up a society) are happy & healthy. there is a reason people rob one another & fight & die... & it's not because they have everything they need & feel safe. maslow's hierarchy (of needs) much?
then you a metric-f*ck-ton whiter than i could have ever imagined. not to mention stupid as f*ck... way to "educate yourself," dummy.
read "nickle & dimed" by barbara ehrenreich
you realize someone needs to grow up in an environment that teaches that in order for it to actually happen? kids don't just succeed in school because they try their hardest & provide for themselves all of the proper equipment & motivation (needed) to succeed. they have to be taught by their environment to be good @ school, & be good @ being autodidactic. if you live in destitution, this sort of attitude (achievement oriented) is going to be very rare.
not to mention, no one gives a f*ck if you can do this or that... or know this or that... without a reputation & without a piece of paper (diploma) to demonstrate your aptitude, f*ck all to trying to get a job. & diplomas aren't f*cking cheap.
even if you can miraculously educate yourself... that doesn't mean you can do shit
Just about 90% of the things you said about me were wrong. To disprove them:
- I live in a ghetto.
- I spent 5-6 years of my life in a two bedroom apartment with my parents and three younger sisters. We all slept in the same room with old mattress lined up on the floor. My life wasn't exactly glamorous.
- Two people were killed in front of my house last year. An African American woman pushed her husbands head in front of a car and local neighborhood gang drove by and shot a young man walking down the street.
My father who did not have a college degree got a job as a cable salesmen, and busted his ass to get us an education. I think you're wrong. I do know what it's like being poverty stricken. You're ignorant. :)
Posted by: illmortal Mar 30 2009, 06:40 PM
lol legitimate ghettos don't even have cable (ghettos become systematic prisons).. much less the luxury of internet service, unless of course you're using dial up.
Posted by: heartquasm Mar 31 2009, 04:59 PM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 11:57 AM)
The one thing that bugs me the most is when people simply associate Socialism with Karl Marx. That's Marxism. Not Socialism in its' pure form. Study all the ancient tribes and their "governing" system and you'll discover that majority of the ancients all lived in socialized government.
I agree that Communism and/or Socialism can't be immediately associated with Marx. Since I was the first to briefly bring up Marx, I just want to clarify that I didn't mean to associate him with Socialism. I'm merely using him as a way into understanding Capitalism since he provides a really dense and rather insightful critique on Capitalism.
anyways... back to reading the rest of this thread before posting >.<
Posted by: NoSex Mar 31 2009, 06:24 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Mar 30 2009, 05:24 PM)
Just about 90% of the things you said about me were wrong.
who cares? if you're out of poverty now, you're an exception to the rule.
what's your point? most of what i said is not only still valid... it's convincing.
not to mention, you sound like a f*cking bourgeois sociopath. what the hell else am i supposed to think when someone says shit like, "anyone can succeed! the american dream is alive in the ghetto!"
Posted by: NoSex Apr 1 2009, 01:00 AM
p.s. http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/poordevelopment.html
Posted by: Kontroll Apr 1 2009, 02:11 AM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Mar 27 2009, 10:57 AM)
Obama is a puppet...
Anyways, Socialism in my opinion is the perfect political and economic system. But it is nearly impossible to have this form of utopia because humans are simply fallible, thus making it hard for socialism to exist in its' purity.
The one thing that bugs me the most is when people simply associate Socialism with Karl Marx. That's Marxism. Not Socialism in its' pure form. Study all the ancient tribes and their "governing" system and you'll discover that majority of the ancients all lived in socialized government.
People also make the mistake of associating socialism with communism. This is also a grave mistake. Some people need to watch the documentaries on Hugo Chavez so they can get a good idea of how Socialism works in real life. Even though Hugo isn't exactly the best candidate, at least he follows the core principles of a socialized nation.
Anyways, Socialism in my opinion is the perfect political and economic system. But it is nearly impossible to have this form of utopia because humans are simply fallible, thus making it hard for socialism to exist in its' purity.
The one thing that bugs me the most is when people simply associate Socialism with Karl Marx. That's Marxism. Not Socialism in its' pure form. Study all the ancient tribes and their "governing" system and you'll discover that majority of the ancients all lived in socialized government.
People also make the mistake of associating socialism with communism. This is also a grave mistake. Some people need to watch the documentaries on Hugo Chavez so they can get a good idea of how Socialism works in real life. Even though Hugo isn't exactly the best candidate, at least he follows the core principles of a socialized nation.
I agree. I believe Obama is a puppet as well. I believe very much that the Bildeberg Group has alot to do with our world economy and how this country is run.
I think that I might have to agree with you. I don't know much about politics, but I'm glad that you brought up humans in this ever debated equation. The system is not perfect, but it's really the people we should look at. We're in a time where people are out to get rich quick and living in a more individualistic society. Socialism, I feel just wouldn't work as of yet.
Yes, Socialism has been connected to some very backwards ideals such as those of Hitler and Karl Marx, but it was the men that drove those societies to the ground.
You know what? I don't even know what I'm talking about. All I know is that Socialism at this point in time wouldn't work.
Nate, do you understand what I'm saying? It seems like the government is going through a transition from capitalism to socialism every year. More and more regulations. Bigger and bigger government. More equality. Am I wrong in this ideology?
Posted by: mipadi Apr 1 2009, 08:11 AM
QUOTE(Kontroll @ Apr 1 2009, 03:11 AM)
I think that I might have to agree with you. I don't know much about politics, but I'm glad that you brought up humans in this ever debated equation. The system is not perfect, but it's really the people we should look at. We're in a time where people are out to get rich quick and living in a more individualistic society. Socialism, I feel just wouldn't work as of yet.
So why capitalism? Does capitalism work any better when combined with the human element? Is capitalism any less corrupt?
Posted by: kryogenjx Apr 1 2009, 12:14 PM
QUOTE(mipadi @ Mar 29 2009, 09:13 AM)
I'm glad you brought this up, because I was going to mention this myself. I actually had the pleasure of meeting Ehrenreich last year -- she came to give a talk on these issues. Unlike most of the people posting in this thread (no offense, but it appears to be the truth), Ehrenreich did attempt to live in minimum-wage jobs for several months, and chronicled the "adventure" in her book. Let's just say she wasn't terribly successful.
I still assert the point, too, that the very idea of capitalism undermines the fabric of society. The whole point of humans forming societies was to share limited resources, instead of fighting over them. It's shocking that we've swung the other way and actually encourage Americans to compete with one another over resources, rather than just helping each other out so everyone's life can be a bit better.
I know there are practical reasons why socialist societies can become corrupt, but no one's presented compelling evidence that capitalist societies aren't just as corrupt.
I still assert the point, too, that the very idea of capitalism undermines the fabric of society. The whole point of humans forming societies was to share limited resources, instead of fighting over them. It's shocking that we've swung the other way and actually encourage Americans to compete with one another over resources, rather than just helping each other out so everyone's life can be a bit better.
I know there are practical reasons why socialist societies can become corrupt, but no one's presented compelling evidence that capitalist societies aren't just as corrupt.
Ehrenreich is full of crap. John Stossel laying the smackdown:
The fact of the matter is, some people just don't deserve things. I'd much rather donate my money to some charity that will do good with the money, than have my taxes go to some crack addict in the spirit of "fairness," when he'll simply buy more drugs. You act as if charity doesn't exist in capitalism either.
I'll read the rest of this later, just wanted to throw that video in the mix.
Posted by: mipadi Apr 1 2009, 12:17 PM
QUOTE(kryogenjx @ Apr 1 2009, 01:14 PM)
Ehrenreich is full of crap. John Stossel laying the smackdown:
John Stossel is pretty full of crap, too.
Posted by: kryogenjx Apr 1 2009, 12:29 PM
But he's got a ballin moustache.
Check and mate.
Posted by: Kontroll Apr 1 2009, 09:19 PM
QUOTE(mipadi @ Apr 1 2009, 08:11 AM)
So why capitalism? Does capitalism work any better when combined with the human element? Is capitalism any less corrupt?
I'm not saying it's the only and best way, but it's worked for the United States for over 200 years. Why the sudden change of feeling? That's really what I want to know.
Just a few quotes to bring up that I found on another forum and some things to discuss:
"rule by corporations is not socialism actually /// privatized gains and socialized losses? NOT socialism"
"Liberals aren't the only ones attempting to flush this nation's freedom down the toilet OP(original poster), have you ever thought that conservatives make bullshit laws which take individual rights away from nonviolent citizens, and somethimes gets them life in prision, just because a conservative says, "THERE SHOULD BE A LAW AGAINST MARIJUANA."
These conservatives are not only taking away our individual rights, but they are also inflicting a light form of facism upon this great nation.
You see, conservatives see something as a "sin" so to change the ideals of these sinners, you use force. Governmental force. This is fascism people!"
"Socialized medicine will provide a higer level of genuine freedom for americans than for-profift medical insurance ever has. The latter system serves to keep people locked in an eternal cycle of servitude that constituts a barrier to one's genuine persuit of happiness."
Discuss.
Posted by: mipadi Apr 1 2009, 10:13 PM
QUOTE(Kontroll @ Apr 1 2009, 10:19 PM)
I'm not saying it's the only and best way, but it's worked for the United States for over 200 years. Why the sudden change of feeling? That's really what I want to know.
Oh, sure it's worked -- for the bourgeois. Capitalism has done its job of keeping rich white men rich, there's no doubt about that. But the working classes? Capitalism supplies them with just enough to keep them from doing anything drastic about their situation. Plus, the working classes are socialized through education, etc., to believe that they can improve their situation merely by working hard.
Posted by: Kontroll Apr 1 2009, 11:17 PM
QUOTE(mipadi @ Apr 1 2009, 10:13 PM)
Oh, sure it's worked -- for the bourgeois. Capitalism has done its job of keeping rich white men rich, there's no doubt about that. But the working classes? Capitalism supplies them with just enough to keep them from doing anything drastic about their situation. Plus, the working classes are socialized through education, etc., to believe that they can improve their situation merely by working hard.
Well, it is true that if you do work hard enough, i.e. get an education and better your situation financially, and know how to manage your assets, you can make a good living. Sure you will still be in the working class, but you can be more than just categorized as 'having enough to keep from doing anything drastic.'
I honestly, don't think that we can blame the government whole heartedly for our situation going on right now, and probably past times. We as a society, I feel, are no longer taking the responsibility for ourselves that we should. We've become accustomed to new programs, and relying on the government for provisions, and I feel that the government is not there to provide, but to protect.
The government shouldn't be worrying about the homeless, or widows, or elderly. That's up to the community to volunteer and come together and provide. Sure that might be a form of socialism, but at least it's not enforced. I feel that over time and through the generations our society has become desensitized and now we've got these ideas that the state should provide for us, and they are through various programs. They shouldn't. The government should protect. That's what laws are for. Protection.
Posted by: NoSex Apr 2 2009, 04:56 PM
QUOTE(Kontroll @ Apr 1 2009, 10:17 PM)
I feel that the government is not there to provide, but to protect.
i would argue that the provision of certain necessities (i.e. food, shelter, etc.) is a form of protection. without these provisions, human beings cannot survive (or at least, not easily survive). insofar as we have the right to "life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness," don't you think that the governments that are designed to secure these rights should make efforts to see that they are actualized? and, don't you feel that only by fulfilling the lower tiers of maslow's hierarchy can we secure these rights?
Posted by: Kontroll Apr 2 2009, 11:11 PM
QUOTE(NoSex @ Apr 2 2009, 04:56 PM)
i would argue that the provision of certain necessities (i.e. food, shelter, etc.) is a form of protection. without these provisions, human beings cannot survive (or at least, not easily survive). insofar as we have the right to "life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness," don't you think that the governments that are designed to secure these rights should make efforts to see that they are actualized? and, don't you feel that only by fulfilling the lower tiers of maslow's hierarchy can we secure these rights?
Considering the fact that he proposed this idea almost fifty years ago, it wouldn't be the best representation of today's society.
Times were different then and self actualization is a different thing these days. In today's world a closed triangle is not a valid representation of society and individuals. An open, wide faced structure is needed in order to reflect that self actualization is never ending. And with this never ending self actualization, individuals can engender lifelong learning, change management, and boundlessness, all important factors for the 1990's educational and managerial environments.
But, to argue your point, I would have to say that self responsibility and not government funding would be the best way to survive in this country. I understand that certain things must be run by the government, especially now considering the vast population. In the past century or so we've gone from a farming nation, to an industrial nation and most of whom were farmers have began working for others instead of providing directly for themselves. Not to say this was a bad shift in culture and society, but its given more room for government to put its foot in the door of privately owned business with regulations, insurance and so forth.
That's all I got for now. Discuss.
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 6 2009, 01:38 PM
QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 31 2009, 07:24 PM)
if you're out of poverty now, you're an exception to the rule.
Just like the poor individuals who's lives have just completely f*cked them over are an exception to my own. I'm not saying Capitalism is perfect Nate. People do fall through the holes, however socialism would need to be restructured before I was ever able to accept it. I see people in my shitty slum of a neighborhood living off the government all the time. These are people who could and should contribute to society by having a job of some sort, but they don't look for a job because the gov't gives them far more than what it nessesary to survive. Instead they stop taking care of themselves and rely on the goverment to bail them out of their incompitance. It's downright unfair to the working class.
QUOTE(mipadi @ Apr 1 2009, 09:11 AM)
So why capitalism? Does capitalism work any better when combined with the human element? Is capitalism any less corrupt?
Because it's not controlled by anyone one thing, and it's monitored to keep it that way. The bottom line, there is no single point of failure.
Socialism, while it paves the way for everyone, it rewards those who are lazy slobs with no ambition to succeed. There is plenty of opportunity for people to succeed in this country under capitalism. While there are exceptions to to anything and capitalism isn't without flaws. It's been successful for the past century. Why should we change it? While I'm sure you could point out several reasons this country was founded on capitalism and became the greatest country in the world because of it. The pros for capitalism far outweigh the cons.
Take health care for example, while everyone seems to insist on pushing nationalized health care they don't see effect of doing so. Doctors who see patients in a nationalized health care system are paid the same regardless of quality of service. Incentive to become a better doctor is stifled. Patients receive service that is not as good, development of medical research is slowed down as a result of reduced private funding, etc... When you take "competition" out of an industry it becomes less productive, and in this case more people inevitably die as a result.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 7 2009, 05:09 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Apr 6 2009, 02:38 PM)
Just like the poor individuals who's lives have just completely f*cked them over are an exception to my own. I'm not saying Capitalism is perfect Nate. People do fall through the holes, however socialism would need to be restructured before I was ever able to accept it. I see people in my shitty slum of a neighborhood living off the government all the time. These are people who could and should contribute to society by having a job of some sort, but they don't look for a job because the gov't gives them far more than what it nessesary to survive. Instead they stop taking care of themselves and rely on the goverment to bail them out of their incompitance. It's downright unfair to the working class.Because it's not controlled by anyone one thing, and it's monitored to keep it that way. The bottom line, there is no single point of failure.
Socialism, while it paves the way for everyone, it rewards those who are lazy slobs with no ambition to succeed. There is plenty of opportunity for people to succeed in this country under capitalism. While there are exceptions to to anything and capitalism isn't without flaws. It's been successful for the past century. Why should we change it? While I'm sure you could point out several reasons this country was founded on capitalism and became the greatest country in the world because of it. The pros for capitalism far outweigh the cons.
Take health care for example, while everyone seems to insist on pushing nationalized health care they don't see effect of doing so. Doctors who see patients in a nationalized health care system are paid the same regardless of quality of service. Incentive to become a better doctor is stifled. Patients receive service that is not as good, development of medical research is slowed down as a result of reduced private funding, etc... When you take "competition" out of an industry it becomes less productive, and in this case more people inevitably die as a result.
Socialism, while it paves the way for everyone, it rewards those who are lazy slobs with no ambition to succeed. There is plenty of opportunity for people to succeed in this country under capitalism. While there are exceptions to to anything and capitalism isn't without flaws. It's been successful for the past century. Why should we change it? While I'm sure you could point out several reasons this country was founded on capitalism and became the greatest country in the world because of it. The pros for capitalism far outweigh the cons.
Take health care for example, while everyone seems to insist on pushing nationalized health care they don't see effect of doing so. Doctors who see patients in a nationalized health care system are paid the same regardless of quality of service. Incentive to become a better doctor is stifled. Patients receive service that is not as good, development of medical research is slowed down as a result of reduced private funding, etc... When you take "competition" out of an industry it becomes less productive, and in this case more people inevitably die as a result.
not aalll ppl lyke dat foo..
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 7 2009, 05:39 PM
QUOTE(PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH @ Apr 7 2009, 06:09 PM)
not aalll ppl lyke dat foo..
Everyone knows not all people are like that. Next time, read what's been said before you comment.
QUOTE
I see people in my shitty slum of a neighborhood living off the government all the time.
Those are the people I'm referring to; not all people.
Posted by: Tung Apr 7 2009, 05:41 PM
o shiet.... harryy potta callin u out princee... 
gogo.. 
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 7 2009, 05:55 PM
^i got this.. WATCH 
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Apr 7 2009, 06:39 PM)
Everyone knows not all people are like that. Next time, read what's been said before you comment.
Those are the people I'm referring to; not all people.
Those are the people I'm referring to; not all people.
you ever thought the ppl living in the slum not all bums?
COM ON BEECH... aintt gitt alll daii..
LIT GO..
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 8 2009, 10:34 AM
Again, you need to read.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 10:41 AM
QUOTE
I see people in my shitty slum of a neighborhood living off the government all the time.
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Apr 8 2009, 11:34 AM)
Again, you need to read.
check yourself bitch..
P.S u lil gurl.. y log outt.. i hatt dat shiet.. log out suu u kan thenk of sum shiet da post latur.. n i gotta logg bak en n post bak.. y nott juss talkk rite now..
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 8 2009, 12:39 PM
You're a waste of time.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 01:01 PM
PFFT
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 8 2009, 02:05 PM
You're a waste of time.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 02:32 PM
pfft
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 8 2009, 03:26 PM
You're a waste of time.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 03:30 PM
pfft
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 8 2009, 03:43 PM
You're a waste of time.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 03:45 PM
pfft
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 8 2009, 03:49 PM
You're a waste of time.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 03:51 PM
pfft
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 8 2009, 03:53 PM
You're a waste of time.
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 03:55 PM
lol.. i can type buncha GHANDI bs.. but why..OH wait..
Mlk n ghandi both pussy who know they cant win with violence so they gotta sit still n pray...
i edit so you get everything.. i feel bad u gitta log in n out so..
P.S slowass comeback mofo.. sigh...its all good..
if you dont come up with a comeback in 10 minutes.. my hands are raised!!i dont got time for your log in n lateass reply bs...
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 04:06 PM
5 minutes left
Posted by: PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH Apr 8 2009, 04:08 PM
time UP...
go cry n jurk of 2 dat NUB
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTefQNEt1J0L4ARGmjzbkF/SIG=12h9plrkl/EXP=1239311245/**http%3A//www.ticketstogo.com/images_user/Concerts/R/R-Kelly.jpghttp://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTefQNEt1J0L4ARGmjzbkF/SIG=12h9plrkl/EXP=1239311245/**http%3A//www.ticketstogo.com/images_user/Concerts/R/R-Kelly.jpg
Posted by: Tung Apr 8 2009, 06:33 PM
goddd damn...harryy pottaa losinggg to prince...
Posted by: illmortal Apr 8 2009, 07:06 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Apr 6 2009, 02:38 PM)
Just like the poor individuals who's lives have just completely f*cked them over are an exception to my own. I'm not saying Capitalism is perfect Nate. People do fall through the holes, however socialism would need to be restructured before I was ever able to accept it. I see people in my shitty slum of a neighborhood living off the government all the time. These are people who could and should contribute to society by having a job of some sort, but they don't look for a job because the gov't gives them far more than what it nessesary to survive. Instead they stop taking care of themselves and rely on the goverment to bail them out of their incompitance. It's downright unfair to the working class.
Because it's not controlled by anyone one thing, and it's monitored to keep it that way. The bottom line, there is no single point of failure.
Socialism, while it paves the way for everyone, it rewards those who are lazy slobs with no ambition to succeed. There is plenty of opportunity for people to succeed in this country under capitalism. While there are exceptions to to anything and capitalism isn't without flaws. It's been successful for the past century. Why should we change it? While I'm sure you could point out several reasons this country was founded on capitalism and became the greatest country in the world because of it. The pros for capitalism far outweigh the cons.
Take health care for example, while everyone seems to insist on pushing nationalized health care they don't see effect of doing so. Doctors who see patients in a nationalized health care system are paid the same regardless of quality of service. Incentive to become a better doctor is stifled. Patients receive service that is not as good, development of medical research is slowed down as a result of reduced private funding, etc... When you take "competition" out of an industry it becomes less productive, and in this case more people inevitably die as a result.
Because it's not controlled by anyone one thing, and it's monitored to keep it that way. The bottom line, there is no single point of failure.
Socialism, while it paves the way for everyone, it rewards those who are lazy slobs with no ambition to succeed. There is plenty of opportunity for people to succeed in this country under capitalism. While there are exceptions to to anything and capitalism isn't without flaws. It's been successful for the past century. Why should we change it? While I'm sure you could point out several reasons this country was founded on capitalism and became the greatest country in the world because of it. The pros for capitalism far outweigh the cons.
Take health care for example, while everyone seems to insist on pushing nationalized health care they don't see effect of doing so. Doctors who see patients in a nationalized health care system are paid the same regardless of quality of service. Incentive to become a better doctor is stifled. Patients receive service that is not as good, development of medical research is slowed down as a result of reduced private funding, etc... When you take "competition" out of an industry it becomes less productive, and in this case more people inevitably die as a result.
Specifically, what exact part of Socializing would need restructuring? You do realize, that in America, we have or had what's called a mixed economy
And to be quite honest, we haven't been as productive. The best thing we can come up with is cars and xboxes lol...
Posted by: Tung Apr 8 2009, 07:08 PM
oh shiett...
...tama nd prince..vs. uronicccdd .... gogogogo
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 9 2009, 09:39 AM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Apr 8 2009, 08:06 PM)
Specifically, what exact part of Socializing would need restructuring? You do realize, that in America, we have or had what's called a mixed economy
And to be quite honest, we haven't been as productive. The best thing we can come up with is cars and xboxes lol...
And to be quite honest, we haven't been as productive. The best thing we can come up with is cars and xboxes lol...
The system needs to be restructured in such a way that people are encourage to better themselves and be rewarded for it.
- Getting a Job
- Getting an Education
- Being a hard working individual
Socialism, in it's current context encourages many able bodied citizens to sit back and allow the government to bail them out time and time again. That's the problem I have with socialism.
I'm all for helping people who are trying to be the best they can while life keeps taking a shit on them. I'm all for helping people who cannot physically work due to a disability. I'm all for helping the single mother who's been left by a selfish father and has 2-3 extra mouths to feed. I'm not for helping people who drowned themselves in debt and expect to be bailed out or able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
Posted by: WarMachine Apr 9 2009, 11:03 AM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Apr 9 2009, 10:39 AM)
The system needs to be restructured in such a way that people are encourage to better themselves and be rewarded for it.
- Getting a Job
- Getting an Education
- Being a hard working individual
Socialism, in it's current context encourages many able bodied citizens to sit back and allow the government to bail them out time and time again. That's the problem I have with socialism.
I'm all for helping people who are trying to be the best they can while life keeps taking a shit on them. I'm all for helping people who cannot physically work due to a disability. I'm all for helping the single mother who's been left by a selfish father and has 2-3 extra mouths to feed. I'm not for helping people who drowned themselves in debt and expect to be bailed out or able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
- Getting a Job
- Getting an Education
- Being a hard working individual
Socialism, in it's current context encourages many able bodied citizens to sit back and allow the government to bail them out time and time again. That's the problem I have with socialism.
I'm all for helping people who are trying to be the best they can while life keeps taking a shit on them. I'm all for helping people who cannot physically work due to a disability. I'm all for helping the single mother who's been left by a selfish father and has 2-3 extra mouths to feed. I'm not for helping people who drowned themselves in debt and expect to be bailed out or able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
It's not so much a matter of debt, but credit. The credit system is flawed and in the end, the entire economy takes a hit. You can't possibly attribute someone's credit issues, or accrued debt, to inability to be a productive member of society? That's pretty outlandish.
Posted by: illmortal Apr 9 2009, 11:48 AM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Apr 9 2009, 10:39 AM)
The system needs to be restructured in such a way that people are encourage to better themselves and be rewarded for it.
- Getting a Job
- Getting an Education
- Being a hard working individual
Socialism, in it's current context encourages many able bodied citizens to sit back and allow the government to bail them out time and time again. That's the problem I have with socialism.
I'm all for helping people who are trying to be the best they can while life keeps taking a shit on them. I'm all for helping people who cannot physically work due to a disability. I'm all for helping the single mother who's been left by a selfish father and has 2-3 extra mouths to feed. I'm not for helping people who drowned themselves in debt and expect to be bailed out or able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
- Getting a Job
- Getting an Education
- Being a hard working individual
Socialism, in it's current context encourages many able bodied citizens to sit back and allow the government to bail them out time and time again. That's the problem I have with socialism.
I'm all for helping people who are trying to be the best they can while life keeps taking a shit on them. I'm all for helping people who cannot physically work due to a disability. I'm all for helping the single mother who's been left by a selfish father and has 2-3 extra mouths to feed. I'm not for helping people who drowned themselves in debt and expect to be bailed out or able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
GIve me an example where a socialist nation has a bunch of bums because competition has been removed.
Show me which Socialist nation is currently encouraging citizens to sit back and mooch off the government.
You do know that there's many ancient civilizations whose had a form of socialism... right?
I've never heard of Socialism causing people to become lazy. I can imagine in a Communist scenario, sure... where they literally work for no money, Russia is a good example.
Competition, imo, isn't needed to prosper.
Posted by: WarMachine Apr 9 2009, 11:57 AM
QUOTE(illmortal @ Apr 9 2009, 12:48 PM)
Competition, imo, isn't needed to prosper.
Good point. I actually agree with you.
Americans have come to accept this as normal and "right." Capitalism causes consumerism.
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 9 2009, 01:02 PM
QUOTE(WarMachine @ Apr 9 2009, 12:03 PM)
It's not so much a matter of debt, but credit. The credit system is flawed and in the end, the entire economy takes a hit. You can't possibly attribute someone's credit issues, or accrued debt, to inability to be a productive member of society? That's pretty outlandish.
I didn't it was an OR statement. I'm not for:
1. Bailing out people who have accrued massive debt. They need to take responsibility for their actions.
2. Bailing out able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
These are separate things. I agree with you.
QUOTE(illmortal @ Apr 9 2009, 12:48 PM)
Show me which Socialist nation is currently encouraging citizens to sit back and mooch off the government.
Competition, imo, isn't needed to prosper.
Competition, imo, isn't needed to prosper.
Our mixed capitolist/socialist country is a prime example of a country were 10s of 1000s of Americans already take advantage of the system. Show me we're headed in a different direction.
Competition shouldn't be required, but alas it is in our instinct to be selfish. That's where the problem lies.
Posted by: WarMachine Apr 9 2009, 01:55 PM
QUOTE(Uronacid @ Apr 9 2009, 02:02 PM)
I didn't it was an OR statement. I'm not for:
1. Bailing out people who have accrued massive debt. They need to take responsibility for their actions.
2. Bailing out able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
These are separate things. I agree with you.
1. Bailing out people who have accrued massive debt. They need to take responsibility for their actions.
2. Bailing out able bodied citizens who've given up on being productive members of society.
These are separate things. I agree with you.
I see, I see. Thanks for the clarification.
The way you view capitalism and the reasons you provide that support it, don't seem to be playing out that way in reality. You're for capitalism; that much is clear. However, I think it would be fair to explore other alternatives given our economy's current state of affairs.
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 9 2009, 03:27 PM
QUOTE(WarMachine @ Apr 9 2009, 02:55 PM)
I see, I see. Thanks for the clarification.
The way you view capitalism and the reasons you provide that support it, don't seem to be playing out that way in reality. You're for capitalism; that much is clear. However, I think it would be fair to explore other alternatives given our economy's current state of affairs.
The way you view capitalism and the reasons you provide that support it, don't seem to be playing out that way in reality. You're for capitalism; that much is clear. However, I think it would be fair to explore other alternatives given our economy's current state of affairs.
I don't mind exploring alternatives, but I'm clearly against moving to socialism just for the sake of changing.
Regarding our economy: I know we're in a recession,however this isn't a crisis. The condition of our economy is no where near the condition of our economy during the great depression. The media is full of propaganda right now. I believe that the 700 billion dollar bail out is simply a means to create a real crisis. A crisis that will make the American citizens so desperate for change that they'll willing adopt a system that takes away their freedom.
Posted by: mike0C Apr 23 2009, 10:06 PM
Capitalism > Socialism.
Posted by: WarMachine Apr 24 2009, 07:32 AM
QUOTE(mike0C @ Apr 23 2009, 11:06 PM)
Capitalism > Socialism.
That's your argument?
failfag has failed.
Posted by: Uronacid Apr 24 2009, 11:39 AM
QUOTE(mike0C @ Apr 23 2009, 11:06 PM)
Capitalism > Socialism.
Yeah, you have to say more than that.
Posted by: illriginal Apr 24 2009, 12:50 PM
QUOTE(mike0C @ Apr 23 2009, 11:06 PM)
Capitalism > Socialism.
Funny
Socialism > Capitalism
lol Can you say why?
And how do you know what Capitalism is in its purest form? Capitalism or Reganomics only lasted until Regan left office, then Social economics or at least properties of socialism started to creep into the foundation of Capitalism. Why, you ask? Because of profits
Posted by: Kontroll Apr 25 2009, 12:38 AM
QUOTE(PrinceGonnaChokeaBEECH @ Apr 8 2009, 04:08 PM)
go cry n jurk of 2 dat NUB
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTefQNEt1J0L4ARGmjzbkF/SIG=12h9plrkl/EXP=1239311245/**http%3A//www.ticketstogo.com/images_user/Concerts/R/R-Kelly.jpghttp://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTefQNEt1J0L4ARGmjzbkF/SIG=12h9plrkl/EXP=1239311245/**http%3A//www.ticketstogo.com/images_user/Concerts/R/R-Kelly.jpg
/b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ /b/ lets get 'em on this shit!