Why do liberals blame the rich for our problems?
It was Muslims and Mexicans who caused the banking crisis. George Soros is evil, unlike the Koch brothers who friends of the working man.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Tatsumi · 31-35, M
You're trolling, right. You're trolling. I almost answered seriously. But, just in case, read Das Kapital. Essentially, it's because capitalism is a system in which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. When money is power, it's rule by merchant.
What is the point of a business? To earn profit. Nothing else. It seeks that goal and nothing more. In order to maximize that goal, they want to take advantage of workers as much as possible. Government regulations seek to stop this, but since money is power, rule by merchant comes into play. Through legal lobbying (bribing), large companies can dictate legislation to further maximize their profits and cut benefits to workers.
Doubly so, the ultra wealthy owners of large corporations contribute nothing to society. The only reason they make money is because they purchased means of production, then hired workers to make them money. They essentially just sit around and make more money than all of their employees--the ones who are actually producing for society--combined twice, thrice over.
It's nothing short of slavery; only slavery's definition changed to encompass everyone. And the best kind of slave is one that doesn't even know they're a slave.
People on the left blame the rich, due to the ever-widening income inequality. Mexicans and Muslims didn't increase the gap between the rich and the poor since the 1970s. 1% of the population owns 50% of all the wealth and around 25% of all the money. The reason the left blames the rich is because this income gap gets wider and wider every year, because the rich seek more and more and more profit; it's never enough. And it's going to destroy the middle class.
What is the point of a business? To earn profit. Nothing else. It seeks that goal and nothing more. In order to maximize that goal, they want to take advantage of workers as much as possible. Government regulations seek to stop this, but since money is power, rule by merchant comes into play. Through legal lobbying (bribing), large companies can dictate legislation to further maximize their profits and cut benefits to workers.
Doubly so, the ultra wealthy owners of large corporations contribute nothing to society. The only reason they make money is because they purchased means of production, then hired workers to make them money. They essentially just sit around and make more money than all of their employees--the ones who are actually producing for society--combined twice, thrice over.
It's nothing short of slavery; only slavery's definition changed to encompass everyone. And the best kind of slave is one that doesn't even know they're a slave.
People on the left blame the rich, due to the ever-widening income inequality. Mexicans and Muslims didn't increase the gap between the rich and the poor since the 1970s. 1% of the population owns 50% of all the wealth and around 25% of all the money. The reason the left blames the rich is because this income gap gets wider and wider every year, because the rich seek more and more and more profit; it's never enough. And it's going to destroy the middle class.
TexChik · F
Socialist mantra. Guess you haven't heard socialism fails ...
ALWAYS
ALWAYS
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
TexChik · F
@ColdPenguin: Sweden is not the US ... the 90% tax rate and the lack of personal choice is disturbing ... but they do require a government issued rifle in every home ... and training
Tatsumi · 31-35, M
@TexChik: You clearly understand nothing. The Sweden Tax rate is based on income like the U.S.; its layered. It's at 56%, at the bottom, not 90%. There is still plenty of "choice".
And the U.S. tax rate is the lowest in the world at like 25%. Look where that has gotten us. Most violent and criminal modern nation. We have 10 times the amount of crime and pretty close to as much violence as Cartel-run Mexcio. And Mexico is a 3rd world country. Strong economy, but 3rd world with tons of murderous Cartels and severe income inequality, as a developing nation.
If you invest in social programs (e.g. libraries, parks, recreation centers, police, firefighters--all socialist systems, in the U.S.; and, provide means to train and hire workers; make sure people are *happy*), then you are investing in a healthy society. Taxes are a GOOD thing. Look at most modern countries and this proves true.
Low taxes = crime. High taxes = social stability
But let me ask you. What do you think the reason is that the U.S. is the most violent and criminal modern nation?
And the U.S. tax rate is the lowest in the world at like 25%. Look where that has gotten us. Most violent and criminal modern nation. We have 10 times the amount of crime and pretty close to as much violence as Cartel-run Mexcio. And Mexico is a 3rd world country. Strong economy, but 3rd world with tons of murderous Cartels and severe income inequality, as a developing nation.
If you invest in social programs (e.g. libraries, parks, recreation centers, police, firefighters--all socialist systems, in the U.S.; and, provide means to train and hire workers; make sure people are *happy*), then you are investing in a healthy society. Taxes are a GOOD thing. Look at most modern countries and this proves true.
Low taxes = crime. High taxes = social stability
But let me ask you. What do you think the reason is that the U.S. is the most violent and criminal modern nation?
TexChik · F
@ColdPenguin: you clearly understand nothing ... the US suffers from the corruption of the left. Gun crime control laws that worked were abolished ... because those predominantly violating them were minorities ... blaming America for the failure of liberal policies is so common for those that can only politicize because the they don't like what works . Inner city schools and their failures is the root of the problem. Take away the numbers from the liberal controlled sanctuary cities ... which also happen to have the poorest schools... and the US doesn't have any fun problems . Libtards have to have someone to blame while never fixing the problems ... only making more false promises for a vote .
TexChik · F
@Kuronekko: blame is what libtards deserve and understand ... Bush isn't around, look in the mirror
Tatsumi · 31-35, M
@TexChik: I agree with you. Somewhat. At least on the last liberal point. Liberalism is counterproductice in many ways, especially in its deifying of minorities. In its quest to be better than human, it leads to ignoring major causes of issues of the people they are trying to save in order to save face. Ultimately leading to not onlu ignoring real problems for minorities and everyone else, but actively making them worse in many cases. Liberalism is a disease.
But if one is a liberal, they must be on the left; if one is on the left, they do not have to be liberal.
However, poverty is the issue, as you suggested. Minorities aren't inherently evil. Just like whites aren't inherently evil. Poverty and feelings of inequality create crime, whatever the race. Just happens that minorities are the largest of the impoverished, per capita. Minorities that live in good areas aren't criminal. It's only low class, ghetto *people* who turn to crime and violence. Yes, there is personal responsibility, which cant be overlooked. But there is also social influence.
Poverty leads to ignorance and lack of education which leads to crime. When you have high income inequality, feelings of inequality also inflame the issue.
I don't know what you mean by "sanctuary city".
Though, it's been more than proven that where there are guns, there is more death.
I'm not sure i understood your solution. What would you do to solve this problem of inner city violence?
But if one is a liberal, they must be on the left; if one is on the left, they do not have to be liberal.
However, poverty is the issue, as you suggested. Minorities aren't inherently evil. Just like whites aren't inherently evil. Poverty and feelings of inequality create crime, whatever the race. Just happens that minorities are the largest of the impoverished, per capita. Minorities that live in good areas aren't criminal. It's only low class, ghetto *people* who turn to crime and violence. Yes, there is personal responsibility, which cant be overlooked. But there is also social influence.
Poverty leads to ignorance and lack of education which leads to crime. When you have high income inequality, feelings of inequality also inflame the issue.
I don't know what you mean by "sanctuary city".
Though, it's been more than proven that where there are guns, there is more death.
I'm not sure i understood your solution. What would you do to solve this problem of inner city violence?
TexChik · F
@Kuronekko: oh great, now libs are telling me what I think .. you haven't a clue.
This message was deleted by its author.
Tatsumi · 31-35, M
@satanburger: TL;DR Yes, and the right likes to ignore that capitalism also results in running out of money, shown by numerous countries like Greece, Italy, Spain, Africa, Malaysia, etc: not to mention the many financial crises we've had: only thing keeping us afloat is preying on 3rd world resources, at their expense. And, yes, there are socialist programs in the U.S. Many that work. Public education was still publically funded in the 50s and 60s, when it was the best in the world.
The point of the question was in response to "Socialism NEVER works". Well, yes, it does. No one was saying "copy everything Sweden does". What we should say is that social programs do very well for Germany--majorly capitalist, but with free college and worker training, the same with much more socialist, yet still capitalist Denmark. The point is: social programs are IMPORTANT.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
And I'll say the problem with capitalism is the same thing. They're always running out of other peoples' money, due to insidious corruption. I'd rather be running out of money when all my peoples' stomachs are full and they are happy and stable, rather than running out of money as crime and violence skyrockets due to lack of social programs.
"Certain factors". Mhm. And these "certain factors" are just "certain", despite being undefined?
Yes, and righties like to say "BUT THE U.S.", while ignoring Honduras, Africa, Spain, Italy, Greece, Mexico, The Philippines, Russia, Ukraine, Malaysia, etc, etc. Capitalism breeds corruption and instigates violence and crime via inevitable wealth inequality. Americans are largely under the mistaken impression that capitalism creates candy and kittens and fountains of joy and prosperity, anywhere it exists. It does not.
And the US isn't even a good example of working capitalism, incidentally. We have a financial crisis every other decade. Or every decade. Remember the big one recently? The result of giant banks betting on both sides of the housing market and destroying everything, as a result of their infinite greed? Of predatory lending and excessive risk taking?
And what happened to them? They got bailed out by the taxpayers. Including TARP, Around 13 TRILLION dollars of taxpayer money was spent to keep big business alive when it should have failed, not just the 1 trillion that was directly handed to them. That is the point. "Too big to fail." That is power. And that is the power that is collected in free market capitalism; that's what happens when government regulations do not control the growth of conglomerates. That's what happens when you deregulate.
That is the issue in capitalism. Monopolies, which will inevitably form, as money is power in capitalism. Whatever government regulations exist will be overpowered, eventually. The rich have too much power. And they will use that power to obtain more power, even if it destroys the American economy--even if it destroys what made America great: the middle class. So, as I said, capitalism also means running out of money.
Yes. Good quote from a no-name author with 0 qualifications. Exactly how is the United States a "social society". It's pure individualism.
No one is saying "Copy everything the Swedish do." Obviously there is a cultural difference. I agree, as Switzerland has a significantly high rate of firearm ownership, yet very little homicide. That is an exception that exists nowhere else, and cannot be repeated in the US due to a difference of culture.
You're response is a misnomer, as no one claimed that we should copy everything Sweden does. It was a claim in defiance of the statement "Socialism has NEVER worked." Well, incorrect. It has worked.
Yes. Let us not forget that America is a mixed economy with many socialist programs. It has worked, and it works on a daily basis in America, as a mixed economy.
Public education was still publically funded in the 1950s and 60s when it was the best in the world. America's socialism shows in the form of social security; medicare; police; fire fighters; public recreation centers; public libraries, and probably more.
This issue of misallocated money....is an issue of misallocated money. Not an inherent issue with socialism. The thing that destroyed American public education was No Child Left Behind [all children left behind] and Rise To The Top. Not public funding. Where the money comes from has nothing to do with how it is spent.
And, as I just stated, is the same true of police? Recreation centers? Libraries? Fire Fighters? Are they also faulty systems because they are socialist?
As for the inner city, maybe that whole 250 years of slavery and oppression had something to do with something. That is an issue that is not easily fixed by capitalism or socialism. It will take time. And creating pay-for-everything-out-of-pocket won't help the inner city or the crime rates. It will make things worse. Way worse.
Would you suggest making public schools private? Or making the police private? So you'd have to pay the police to come and rescue you when someone was invading your home? Give them your credit card number, as someone is putting a gun to your head?
The point of the question was in response to "Socialism NEVER works". Well, yes, it does. No one was saying "copy everything Sweden does". What we should say is that social programs do very well for Germany--majorly capitalist, but with free college and worker training, the same with much more socialist, yet still capitalist Denmark. The point is: social programs are IMPORTANT.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
And I'll say the problem with capitalism is the same thing. They're always running out of other peoples' money, due to insidious corruption. I'd rather be running out of money when all my peoples' stomachs are full and they are happy and stable, rather than running out of money as crime and violence skyrockets due to lack of social programs.
"Certain factors". Mhm. And these "certain factors" are just "certain", despite being undefined?
Yes, and righties like to say "BUT THE U.S.", while ignoring Honduras, Africa, Spain, Italy, Greece, Mexico, The Philippines, Russia, Ukraine, Malaysia, etc, etc. Capitalism breeds corruption and instigates violence and crime via inevitable wealth inequality. Americans are largely under the mistaken impression that capitalism creates candy and kittens and fountains of joy and prosperity, anywhere it exists. It does not.
And the US isn't even a good example of working capitalism, incidentally. We have a financial crisis every other decade. Or every decade. Remember the big one recently? The result of giant banks betting on both sides of the housing market and destroying everything, as a result of their infinite greed? Of predatory lending and excessive risk taking?
And what happened to them? They got bailed out by the taxpayers. Including TARP, Around 13 TRILLION dollars of taxpayer money was spent to keep big business alive when it should have failed, not just the 1 trillion that was directly handed to them. That is the point. "Too big to fail." That is power. And that is the power that is collected in free market capitalism; that's what happens when government regulations do not control the growth of conglomerates. That's what happens when you deregulate.
That is the issue in capitalism. Monopolies, which will inevitably form, as money is power in capitalism. Whatever government regulations exist will be overpowered, eventually. The rich have too much power. And they will use that power to obtain more power, even if it destroys the American economy--even if it destroys what made America great: the middle class. So, as I said, capitalism also means running out of money.
Yes. Good quote from a no-name author with 0 qualifications. Exactly how is the United States a "social society". It's pure individualism.
No one is saying "Copy everything the Swedish do." Obviously there is a cultural difference. I agree, as Switzerland has a significantly high rate of firearm ownership, yet very little homicide. That is an exception that exists nowhere else, and cannot be repeated in the US due to a difference of culture.
You're response is a misnomer, as no one claimed that we should copy everything Sweden does. It was a claim in defiance of the statement "Socialism has NEVER worked." Well, incorrect. It has worked.
Yes. Let us not forget that America is a mixed economy with many socialist programs. It has worked, and it works on a daily basis in America, as a mixed economy.
Public education was still publically funded in the 1950s and 60s when it was the best in the world. America's socialism shows in the form of social security; medicare; police; fire fighters; public recreation centers; public libraries, and probably more.
This issue of misallocated money....is an issue of misallocated money. Not an inherent issue with socialism. The thing that destroyed American public education was No Child Left Behind [all children left behind] and Rise To The Top. Not public funding. Where the money comes from has nothing to do with how it is spent.
And, as I just stated, is the same true of police? Recreation centers? Libraries? Fire Fighters? Are they also faulty systems because they are socialist?
As for the inner city, maybe that whole 250 years of slavery and oppression had something to do with something. That is an issue that is not easily fixed by capitalism or socialism. It will take time. And creating pay-for-everything-out-of-pocket won't help the inner city or the crime rates. It will make things worse. Way worse.
Would you suggest making public schools private? Or making the police private? So you'd have to pay the police to come and rescue you when someone was invading your home? Give them your credit card number, as someone is putting a gun to your head?