th24
Team Captain
Posts: 2,886 
Dislikes:
|
Post by th24 on Mar 9, 2014 11:46:29 GMT -5
LOOK IT UP! Liberals are uncomfortable with this ad, because they're offended by the very notion of American exceptionalism. I Think It's Awesome!
|
|
gorvy
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 10,047
Dislikes:
|
Post by gorvy on Mar 9, 2014 14:06:48 GMT -5
This probably has nothing to do with your post, but I read today that the top 85 wealthy people in the world (or about one football team) have more money than half the world's poorest population (3.5 billion people) combined. I am a huge proponent of capitalism but there is something wrong with this picture.
|
|
glen
Team Captain
Posts: 1,893
Dislikes:
|
Post by glen on Mar 9, 2014 16:31:03 GMT -5
Gorvy - your comment is interesting. I'm not sure there is a causal relationship between the top 85 v the other 3.5B.
I'd argue that MORE capitalism (and democracy) will do more to help those 3.5B than anything else. Most of those poor I bet live under totalitarian regimes.
It is bumper sticker arguments like that though that make liberalism any easy sell. Sure the top 85 have more than they can spend in their lives. Sure the worlds poorest are screwed. How do they relate? They don't. Is it fair? Probably not but in what world has fairness won out? Is it fair that the gazelle is dinner for the lion? So what's the point? Do you have some realistic, workable, non-utopian solution? If not your comment indicts capitalism but from my perspective capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system. Is it perfect? Nope, but I highly suspect it isn't keeping 3.5B people down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2014 18:42:42 GMT -5
Gorvy - your comment is interesting. I'm not sure there is a causal relationship between the top 85 v the other 3.5B. I'd argue that MORE capitalism (and democracy) will do more to help those 3.5B than anything else. Most of those poor I bet live under totalitarian regimes. It is bumper sticker arguments like that though that make liberalism any easy sell. Sure the top 85 have more than they can spend in their lives. Sure the worlds poorest are screwed. How do they relate? They don't. Is it fair? Probably not but in what world has fairness won out? Is it fair that the gazelle is dinner for the lion? So what's the point? Do you have some realistic, workable, non-utopian solution? If not your comment indicts capitalism but from my perspective capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system. Is it perfect? Nope, but I highly suspect it isn't keeping 3.5B people down. Run that "capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system" by me again, please. What data shapes your "perspective"? |
|
CellarRat
Assistant Coach
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,348
Dislikes:
|
Post by CellarRat on Mar 9, 2014 19:23:43 GMT -5
Gorvy - your comment is interesting. I'm not sure there is a causal relationship between the top 85 v the other 3.5B. I'd argue that MORE capitalism (and democracy) will do more to help those 3.5B than anything else. Most of those poor I bet live under totalitarian regimes. It is bumper sticker arguments like that though that make liberalism any easy sell. Sure the top 85 have more than they can spend in their lives. Sure the worlds poorest are screwed. How do they relate? They don't. Is it fair? Probably not but in what world has fairness won out? Is it fair that the gazelle is dinner for the lion? So what's the point? Do you have some realistic, workable, non-utopian solution? If not your comment indicts capitalism but from my perspective capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system. Is it perfect? Nope, but I highly suspect it isn't keeping 3.5B people down. Run that "capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system" by me again, please. What data shapes your "perspective"? Probably the history of this country. |
|
gorvy
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 10,047
Dislikes:
|
Post by gorvy on Mar 9, 2014 19:41:53 GMT -5
Gorvy - your comment is interesting. I'm not sure there is a causal relationship between the top 85 v the other 3.5B. I'd argue that MORE capitalism (and democracy) will do more to help those 3.5B than anything else. Most of those poor I bet live under totalitarian regimes. It is bumper sticker arguments like that though that make liberalism any easy sell. Sure the top 85 have more than they can spend in their lives. Sure the worlds poorest are screwed. How do they relate? They don't. Is it fair? Probably not but in what world has fairness won out? Is it fair that the gazelle is dinner for the lion? So what's the point? Do you have some realistic, workable, non-utopian solution? If not your comment indicts capitalism but from my perspective capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system. Is it perfect? Nope, but I highly suspect it isn't keeping 3.5B people down. "The top 85 and the rest of the 3.5B". Can you even comprehend those numbers? I am having trouble with that is all. Nobody has the solution is my only point and I am not indicting capitalism. As I have said before, technology has doomed poor people, not capitalism. I did not say that it is a causal relationship---- in other words I don't think the wealthy football team's worth of multibillionaires purposely ran up the score on the little sisters of the poor (well, at least not directly for the most part). But the Florida States of this world certainly have not made it any fun for half of the world's population to play the game. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2014 19:48:26 GMT -5
Run that "capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system" by me again, please. What data shapes your "perspective"? Probably the history of this country. Thanks Glen!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
glen
Team Captain
Posts: 1,893
Dislikes:
|
Post by glen on Mar 10, 2014 6:41:41 GMT -5
Exactly - the history of this country. We have 330 million people with a legit shot at making it big. Do some have an easier path? Sure. We don't have a cast system. We don't have royalty. Anyone can make it. We're not all equal however. We all have different talents and capabilities. I love hoop but I'll never dunk unless I have a ladder or a lowered hoop. It is horribly unfair that I'll never be able to play in the NBA but that's life. Along the same lines there are many who will never be a CEO. Unfair, I know. Still - anyone can have a "pet rock" or "hula hoop" kind of idea. That's why this country's combination of capitalism, freedom and democracy (and a culture/legal system based on Judeo-Christian values) is exceptional.
Show me another system around the world that's been as successful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2014 10:18:55 GMT -5
Exactly - the history of this country. We have 330 million people with a legit shot at making it big. Do some have an easier path? Sure. We don't have a cast system. We don't have royalty. Anyone can make it. We're not all equal however. We all have different talents and capabilities. I love hoop but I'll never dunk unless I have a ladder or a lowered hoop. It is horribly unfair that I'll never be able to play in the NBA but that's life. Along the same lines there are many who will never be a CEO. Unfair, I know. Still - anyone can have a "pet rock" or "hula hoop" kind of idea. That's why this country's combination of capitalism, freedom and democracy (and a culture/legal system based on Judeo-Christian values) is exceptional. Show me another system around the world that's been as successful. Nice spiel - where is the hug and apple pie? I was looking for the basis of the statement of yours that I quoted re "capitalism lifting people out of poverty." Focus on the lift part, as in - those already in the state of poverty get "lifted" out by our capitalistic society! I, sadly, believe our system keeps those that are down, DOWN. One could argue that as profits go up, costs go up, wages for those on the mid to low scale do not track with the cost of living so the gap widens and the definition of the poverty level goes up slightly but the income of those at or below that level does not rise to compensate. You may have a great "pet rock" idea but if you don't have even the bare bones minimum financial capability to bring that idea to market you just have a pet rock! OBTW, it's caste system. |
|
th24
Team Captain
Posts: 2,886
Dislikes:
|
Post by th24 on Mar 10, 2014 10:59:01 GMT -5
|
|
gorvy
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 10,047
Dislikes:
|
Post by gorvy on Mar 10, 2014 11:39:08 GMT -5
49 million Americans are suffering from hunger.
|
|
th24
Team Captain
Posts: 2,886
Dislikes:
|
Post by th24 on Mar 10, 2014 12:28:36 GMT -5
49 million Americans are suffering from hunger. OK.. So whats the answer -redistribution of income? |
|
th24
Team Captain
Posts: 2,886
Dislikes:
|
Post by th24 on Mar 10, 2014 12:38:55 GMT -5
The problem in this country is the lack of jobs since Obama took office! Especially for young college grads!
|
|
|
|
Post by SaintsFan on Mar 10, 2014 13:29:07 GMT -5
The problem in this country is the lack of jobs since Obama took office! Especially for young college grads! Stop. The economic problems plaguing this country are systemic not any single presidents fault.. in fact I find those who blame Bush or Obama to be the most ignorant of our society |
|
th24
Team Captain
Posts: 2,886
Dislikes:
|
Post by th24 on Mar 10, 2014 13:43:13 GMT -5
The economic numbers under Obama don't lie!
-Back in 2007, about 10 percent of all unemployed Americans had been out of work for 52 weeks or longer. Today, that number is above 30 percent.
-Last year, an astounding 53 percent of all U.S. college graduates under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.
-Back in 2007, about 10 percent of all unemployed Americans had been out of work for 52 weeks or longer. Today, that number is above 30 percent.
-Those people no longer in the workforce increased by 525,000 in December; 2.9 million Americans left the labor force in 2013, totaling almost 92 million people that are no longer considered a part of the labor force.
-When Obama entered the White House, the mortgage delinquency rate was 7.85 percent. Today, it is 9.72 percent.
-The poverty rate has shot up to 16.1 percent. That is actually higher than when the War on Poverty began in 1965.
-When Barack Obama entered the White House, there were about 32 million Americans on food stamps. Today, there are more than 47 million Americans on food stamps.
|
|
