Topic: Why Socialism is the key - page 16. (Read 33165 times)

I don't think complete socialism is the key, but I do think we need to get much closer to it than the United States has now.  Things like healthcare and higher education shouldn't be things that the poor should have to worry about.

We won't be able to truly flourish as a country until the necessities are taken care of so our best and brightest minds can rise to the top, and nobody should die due to a lack of money while others could afford a whole damn hospital.

I'm sorry you think "correlation" means "has nothing to do with"


And also that you don't care about making life better for poor people.

I'm sorry you can't make the difference between correlation and causation.

I'm sorry you can't read the graph







I'm sorry you can't read the graph

But I dont want to share my btc with others, they are mine and mine alone 

Hmm... Just breaking in to say that life expectancy has nothing to do with income for first, and second life expectancy isn't increasing anymore and hasn't increase in a significant amount for a few decades.

And their lifespan is twice as long.

I'm sorry you hate the truth and freedom.

I'm ok with that. It's more or less already what's happened considering the ideological fracture between Europe and USA.

So now basic propaganda?

Bravo! Your graphs show that poor earn more $ every year! Does that make them richer?

No. Why not? Because if the wages go up, THE PRICES TOO!

OMG you just basically FORGOT INFLATION!!! How can you conclude anything if you don't take into account that things get more and more expensive???

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check/2013/oct/02/poor-richer-poverty-living-standards

Oh and here is a small article about Wealth concentration, seems like you need some reading and education!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_concentration

Ladies and gentlemen, I consider my point as proven. As you can see this fellow seems to believe rich people get there money from some where else than poor people (probably from their own assholes who know?) and he doesn't seem to be aware that people are actually ending up with nothing but survival food all around the world.

If you think the same please just pass through and vote for Trump. You've been brainwashed already.

countries that have the socialization of society. will be to survive the brunt of the problem.

That's what exactly happening. The false socialism is followed in countries where socialism is followed. Only change can be made by good leaders who has the mind to work for the country rather than working for his fellow family and friends

The only thing killing socialism is greed. Greed and corruption.agree very much demoracy agree we have false
democracy but if you will nationalise you will kill economy you will even kill socialism,nationalism
nationalise it worst thing i know that very well

You can say "the poor are getting poorer" as many times as you want,
but it's still the same lie every time you say it.

The poor are getting richer.


http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/poor-getting-richer

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/11/more-on-us-poor-getting-richer-envy-of.html

http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2015/11/18/poor-getting-richer-faster-than-the-rich

Wow, I wasn't aware of that fact.  Okay, in light of that new information I am going to have to retract my position that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, and I am going to have to adopt your understanding that the poor have too much money and the rich don't have enough.  You are too bright for me; therefore, I concede. You win....good luck with your investments.

Cool thread!

Can't follow you all the way there Mowgli, but it's refreshing to see someone in Bitcoin who's not a right wing nutter.

Actually you posted mostly false statements and unfounded opinions.

An actual fact would be something more like "The majority of university professors have no business experience."

I was just pointing out some common facts that any University educated person in the US already understands. I have no opinion on the subject....

And, as far as the social programs that the rich put in place: they put them there for they're own protection!  Do you think that police are hired to protect the poor?  Or, welfare programs are in place because the poor get paid well?  Or, prisons are built to house investment bankers?  Police are hired to stop the poor from slapping the shit out of the rich and taking back their money!  Welfare programs are in place to appease the unemployed so as to maintain a larger labor pool!  And, prisons are built to house those who disagree with the system!

Don't agree with the tax system?....don't use the highways, don't bitch when your water is polluted, don't call the cops when a hood rat threatens to take your stuff, and don't complain when you're city is bombed!

I'm not directing any of this at you specifically....I'm just trying to illustrate a situation that I think we're over simplifying.  Believe me, I have no opinion....I have more than I will ever need thanks to the free market.  I just think it's important to point out facts rather than chase delusions.  The world is constantly at war!  There is a huge global wealth disparity.  And, there is a controlling population of over privileged people who are too distant from global reality, too caught up in there baser daily activities, and too arrogant to listen to facts.

There are no easy questions, no perfect solutions, and no reasonable expectations that people will begin to be fair with one another within the context of our current global economy.

Why was bitcoin conceived? Was it conceived to concentrate wealth or redistribute wealth? How does it fit into our current global economy?  Things are getting BIG!  We need to  start thinking on a macro-scale rather than confine our thinking to our micro-realities! You want to turn a profit off of bitcoin? Embrace its global potential!

Oh well than I guess that invalidates everything I said  


Look, if every single issue was voted on directly by the people it would still be in complete violation of individual rights. Do you value minority rights at all?

Democracy is in essence a tyranny of the majority. Why? Because when any issue is put up to vote, it means that whatever the outcome, anybody in disagreement with that outcome will still be compelled by law to obey it. It takes the freedom of choice away from the individual. Democratically determined policies are always a one-size-fits-all solutions that everybody within that certain jurisdiction must follow.

For example if an certain policy is put to vote and the results are 60% - 40%, the minority group (40%) must comply with the new ruling despite the fact that almost half the voters did not agree with the result.

If you want the best form of direct democracy, than a completely free market environment is what you should favor. Products and services are competing in the market and consumers can choose whatever they want. It's 100% voluntary and for mutual benefit of both parties.


Let me also add something else here...

In a Voluntarist, Free Market society private property and individual rights are the foundation. If you and I were both living in a Voluntarist society, you would have every right to go buy some land, gather your friends and go live in your own little Socialist state. Everybody in within that geographical area could pay taxes, get free stuff, and participate in a Democracy. Personally, I would see no harm in that and although I don't necessarily want to live there, I'd respect your choice.

Myself on the other hand, I would expect that you Socialists would show me the same respect and not FORCE me to live under your governmental structure and pay taxes. I would take care of myself, purchase my health from a private clinic, pay for my childrens education, etc.

Interestingly there is not a single place in the world that exists today where I can exercise my freedom of choice to just opt out of these services! Socialism and governments do not allow for that option because if they did, they would in effect, not be considered Governments.