- Joined
- Nov 11, 2013
- Messages
- 33,522
- Reaction score
- 10,826
- Location
- Between Athens and Jerusalem
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
And they do, the Democrats buy their votes with endless social programs designed to keep anyone from ever having to get off their fat, lazy asses. It's not solving the problem though, just making it worse.
I participate in a political research group, they pay me (Im the "conservative") to give my opinions on different ideas they are thinking about floating to the public. Brown is desperate, and trying to find new ways to bleed the public in order to pay for his liberal fruitopia. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad how many people clap like seals at silly ideas.
Because they think everything should be handed to them without effort to earn it and that they deserve the same salary and benefits as people who actually educate themselves and work for it.
Actually, I'm very familiar with the rest of the world. The data say the opposite of what you claim, including the link that you posted.Really? Are you so unfamiliar with the rest of the world that you do not know which nations have the highest standards of living, and which standards are lowest? Even the author of the OP knew better than to question that! Here, educate yourself on which nations have the highest standards of living.
Successful capitalists are the worst enemy capitalism has.Pssst...your socialism is showing. How is forcibly taking from some to give to others capitalist?
Were you for the bailouts as well?
Austerity measure, no one would lend them the money, now tell me what is the debt of the three socialist countries and who is lending them money to spend there way to prosperity. Remember they were borrowing and spending before they had to cut back as Keynesian did not work.
It is not recovering from anything, you call 25% unemployment a recovery, hell I guess Obama's worst recovery in US history after injecting 8 trillion into the economy is according to liberals the best recovery in US history.
There is not tap dance, all you have to do is look at Spain, France and Greece and any idiot can see socialist countries like these have not prospered, they are overloaded with debt and high unemployment. Hell it's fact. Yet liberals use these countries as models that we should follow. Not if I can help it.
:yawn: focusing on single data points in order to obscure a greater trend is a poor strawman, designed to appeal only to those swayed by imagery.
America's Taxes are the most progressive in the world, and our effective corporate tax rates are similarly higher than the worlds'.
:lol: yeah. The right wing doesn't want to reform our sclerotic, destructive, inhibiting, choking, incomprehensible unbeatable maze of a tax code.
on the contrary - size of living arrangements is indeed pat of ones' quality of life. So is access to things like air conditioning and automobiles. Our poor include people who would not be counted as such in Europe.
Is that the same thing as free trade? Or am I misunderstanding...In recent history and entirely contrary to popular opinion? Trade liberalization.
Yeah, you got it.Is that the same thing as free trade? Or am I misunderstanding...
Popular opinion is against free trade?Yeah, you got it.
Well first, show where I said "first-world socialized democracies".
Second,
View attachment 67171407
Sadly, data prior to 1959 is lacking and would take some determined digging to find. Poverty rates prior to the "New Deal" are of course going to be high considering the affects of the depression and the dust bowl.
List of countries by percentage of population living in poverty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Feel free to look up the socio-economic structure of the ones you want to. Of course, you probably won't like the fact that data is based upon income vs cost of living, something that the US does not do, as reported by those local governments.
Take a look at standards of living. Quality of Life Index by Country 2014 Mid Year
Look at all those socialist countries and closed market countries at the bottom.
Now take a look at cost of living Cost of Living Index by Country 2014 Mid Year
Wow, look at all those "first-world socialized democracies" at the top.
The US, the least socialized of those nations is second highest in standard of living but way down the list of cost of living and near the bottom of people living in abject poverty (other than homeless people, we don't actually have a population living in abject poverty.)
Yes, look at that. The overall numbers in the first graph is NOT what is important, because populations grow over time. What is important is the second graph, where the poverty rate has pretty much stayed steady - between 12-15% since the mid 1960's. Yes, we have more people in poverty now than before then because our population GREW...but our poverty RATE is not that much different.
Speaking of the Depression, what brought us out of the Depression? WWII, of course. And how did WWII bring us out of the Depression? I mean, if socialism is always bad, then WWII should have driven us further into the Depression instead of pulling us out of it, since WWII was - in economic terms - the biggest government-funded economic stimulus in American history, complete with millions of government jobs that were not there before, and millions more of government-funded jobs building ships and tanks and whatnot.
Problem is, according to conservative economic dogma, what we did to build our military for WWII SHOULD have driven us further into the Depression.
"Cost of living", sir, does not matter much at all. How do we know this? Pick a rich city - ANY rich city - and see what the cost of living is there. Singapore? Monte Carlo? London? Tokyo? Sydney? Hong Kong? Go ahead, pick one! Are the people living there in grinding poverty? No. What matters more, sir, is cost of living compared to median wage. What matters is the overall STANDARD of living, not the cost of living. Otherwise, if this were not the case, then Mississippi would be the most prosperous state in the nation...but it's not. Instead, Mississippi's standard of living is - like its cost of living - at the very bottom.
Also, you're comparing apples and oranges. You're pretending that those "socialist countries and closed market countries at the bottom" are what I'm talking about...but I am NOT talking about them, am I? I am referring to first-world socialized democracies...which includes most of western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan...and America. NONE of these are "closed-market" economies...and ALL of them are socialized democracies. FYI, the fact that a nation is a socialized democracy does not guarantee first-world status...but it makes it a heck of a lot more likely. Conversely, the fact that a nation has small government, low effective taxes, and weak regulation may not absolutely guarantee third-world status...but it sure as heck looks like it.
America's more socialized than you seem to realize. Most of our federal budget is taken up with socialistic programs - welfare, HUD, social security, HHS, you name it. Sooo...yes, America IS a socialized democracy and has been one probably since before you were born. Get used to it.
=Glen Contrarian;1063644517But what you're doing is confusing a snapshot with overall trend. It takes TIME to recover - economic recoveries don't happen overnight, and can take several years if it's bad enough. And you know what? All three are STILL first-world nations, unlike ANY nation that has small government, low effective taxes, and weak regulation.
Thanks to the fact that the people live in a first-world socialized nation, they are mostly NOT homeless, but are receiving aids and allowances that allow them to recover. If you think this is stupid, ask yourself this: how can you get hired on (much less maintain) a job if you're homeless, meaning you can't take baths, can't keep your clothes clean, can't shave, etc.? But I guess you yourself think it's better for people to be homeless than it is for you to pay a cup of coffee's worth more in taxes.
You have no real experience in third-world nations, do you? Or if you went to such places you didn't pay attention. Because if you knew what life is like there - as I do - you'd know that while Spain, Greece, and (to a MUCH lesser extent) France are going through relatively tough times...these 'tough times' they're going through are still FAR better than that in ANY nation that has small government, low effective taxes, and weak regulation.
All you seem to be able to think of is "Socialized first-world democracies bad"...but you're NOT thinking, "compared to what?"
None of the poll options will eliminate poverty.What works best to eliminate poverty?
Consider the possibility that the shoe is on the other foot, that I'm right and you're wrong. Consider that these websites are engaging in the practice you accuse me of indulging in.
Still, it's true, in a way, that our tax system remains technically progressive simply because nobody above a certain percentile of income makes enough money to possess a share in the trading pool that isn't undermined by excessive debt. You can only seriously tax rich people because rich people are the only people that seriously have any money.
Still, the contributions of a company like Apple are vastly lower than the benefits it received from American infrastructure and security, which is why we rely on foreign money lenders to make ends meet.
Indeed. If you could realize that, you would be a step closer to realizing the true nature of power and ambition in the United States and what exactly the goals and priorities of our leadership are.
Consider two expensive bloated military projects from Lockheed Martin which happen to be spread out over 40+ states with the lobbying support of hundreds of congressmen. Is the highest priority to ensure we have the best and most efficient war-making ability for the 21st century, or making sure that Lockheed Martin doesn't suffer the consequences of its own incompetence and inability to supply the capabilities that they promised and time frames that were specified? For which reason they rewarded with the contract?
Poverty in America is measured in private debt and reliance on welfare.
Our poor people have commodities they can't afford and houses they can't pay off, and because they have those things they can't afford to contribute to the tax pool. Part of how the Scandinavian countries keep their welfare systems manageable is by ensuring balanced participation in the trading pool from all level of society, sufficient so that nearly every citizen is capable of contributing to the public welfare.
Our poverty is vastly excessive compared to other developed nations by any metric.
okay. I went back and re-figured. The data still says that you are incorrect.
That is incorrect. Europe's middle class make less money, and pay higher taxes than America's.
That is false - Apple's social benefits astronomically outweigh its social costs. That, after all, is why it has the profits it does. Furthermore, revenues are at an all time high. The reason we are dependent upon lenders is because we have a spending problem.
no thanks. I long ago gave up the cheap intellectual cheapness of the fundamental assumption error. people who disagree with you are not evil for doing so.
Yup. That's how smart companies buy off congresscritters. I'm missing the part where the conservative movement - who argues that we need to reduce the incentives for companies to do so by reducing the return on investment - are somehow responsible for Lockheed Martins' corporatist decision-making, which if anything is more ideologically aligned with the left side of the aisle.
I'm also still not sure how that ties directly into the tax code, since that is simply local politics rather than tax law.
That is incorrect. Poverty in America is measured in income. That's why we have a federal poverty line. As an example, I have an uncle who is probably about some ~3-4 millionish in debt. He would be utterly impoverished under your scenario, despite the fact that his net worth is probably in the $~8-10 million range.
Indeed it is sad. It's been a remarkable shell game Sacramento has been playing since Davis was booted from office. It boggles my mind how willing the public is in buying it. Brown and the rest of his Progressive cohorts are drunk with lust for more revenue, no question about it. Considering what they have created, it's no wonder they are. The misinformation and spin is the most amazing thing I've ever seen, and they get a free ride on it. I'm not sure what is worse, the free ride, or the actual misinformation and spin.
Perhaps the worst part about their madness is how poorly the business community is treated. California should be leading the nation in economic activity, as it used to do. It's got everything going for it, except a state government that sees the private sector as a means to economic prosperity for all.
Interesting you have a chance to provide some opinion in the process. That must be an eye opener at times.
Successful capitalists are the worst enemy capitalism has.
In recent history and entirely contrary to popular opinion? Trade liberalization.
Is that the same thing as free trade? Or am I misunderstanding...
RepublicanWork hard, be responsible and use your money wisely. No government is going to eliminate poverty by offering handouts. It's up to the individual.
They'd either change or die and the problem would be solved either way. Unfortunately, we live in a society where stupid decisions are not punished, where liberals don't want anyone to suffer as a result of their bad decisions. If stupidity were painful, there wouldn't be so many stupid people. This is where 40 years of liberal politics has led us.
......It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.
Thomas Sowell
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?