Socialism In Greece Threatens World Financial Stability

arf

 

Well I'm convinced. Let's see, your argument was, "It was Socialism".

 

Even the founder of modern capitalism Adam Smith warned, "Capitalism" doesn't just generate wealth, it could create huge inequality, making some very rich and others very poor". I think those that can only see the benefits of the capitalism are half blind to ignore the downside that goes hand-in-hand with all that is involved in capitalism.

 

See, I think this is the root of liberal stupidity. Capitalism doesn't make people poor. Failure can lead to poverty but that's the chance we all take & at least people are free to compete. You can take anything you want to market and let customers decide if you have a good idea or not. The notion that one's success always comes at the expense of anothers success is simply wrong.

 

Perhaps if you tried to think less individually and far more broadly about Capitalism, you wouldn't make stupid observations like this. Capitalism has the ability to make individuals poor and it has already had a long history of doing so both here and abroad to millions of people. No billions of people. The possibility and some would say likelihood of economic inequality is part and parcel of Capitalism.
Have you ever heard of a country that has a tiny wealthy class and an enormous class of poor people? Does that scenario ring a bell? Those are case where powerful Oligarchs have used economic inequality to make the 99% below them poor. We aren't there yet but we are certainly running in that direction at a break neck speed by ALL economic indicators. So don’t say dumb things that history current events clearly refute.

 

How has capitalism created billions of poor people?

 

Any sociopolitical system has the ability to make people poor or rich. Capitalism at least provides a slightly better chance at growing rich over socialism and a whole heck of a bigger chance of growing rich over communism. Have I heard of a country that has a tiny wealthy class and an enormous class of poor people? Sure. Soviet Russia/the Soviet Union. Farmers and shop keepers were kept poor and ignorant while the wealthy stole from them and crammed several families into one-family homes. How about Uganda, under Idi Amin? China under Mao? Syria? Libya? Iraq? There is no system that will work for the people if the leadership is corrupt.

 

Through pooled wealth at the top of the ladder, through influence peddling and corruption in general just to name a few ways. Regulated Capitalism such as a well-regulated banking system, the breaking up of monopolies, and a tax code that doesn't favor the wealthy, I am all for. The problem is that we don't have well-regulated Capitalism. We have laissez-faire Capitalism which Adam Smith warned us about. I will reiterate, and you will ignore, I have no problem with Capitalism, just unregulated Capitalism. More than once in our history, the banks have had to be slapped down and more than once in our history, the banks have caused economic meltdowns. Your party is completely in their pocket at this point in time and by supporting them you hasten your own economic downfall and are just too blind to realize it. That is completely your choice to make but I am not going down with you.

 

It is not an either/or proposition. You can have both an entrepreneurial-driven capitalism-based system tempered by socialism that respects the rights of the workers. Lots of our European partners have exactly that. The problem with the current state of our country is that workers are under attack from Republicans at the state and federal level financed by the very corporations that benefit from a class of workers that are as beaten down as possible. Tell me unions, the only voice the workers have, aren’t completely under attack. Tell me that public employees aren’t under attack. Tell me that women’s reproductive rights aren’t under attack. Tell me voting rights aren’t under attack. And what do the Republicans in the House choose to spend their time on? Reaffirming that “In God We Trust” is still our national motto. For God sake what the hell does that really matter? I'll go back to my happy place now.

 

The banking crisis a few years ago started in the US, and happened on the Republicans' watch. By the OP's logic, am I entitled to conclude that conservatism leads to nothing but ruin, and the only conceivable answer to the world's economic ills is socialism?

The problems in Greece have mounted as a result of decisions made by both the incumbent socialist government, and its conservative predecessor. And, of course, the EU as a whole has to take a hefty share of the blame as well, and it has been dominated by center-right administrations for many years now.

 

You've described just a couple of ways wealth is created (none of which are capitalism-only) but you failed to show how the system forces "billions" into poverty. Maybe you can get back to us on this one?

Regulated by whom? The gov't?

There's the "but" that is typical of every far left extremist when they argue against basic tenets of our country. Same as when this poster has claimed "I'm not against the 2nd Amendment, but...."

 

Obvioulsy, the old-time unions are irrelevant. Today they serve 1 purpose: to raise funds for liberal political causes. Unions (and the artificially inflated wages they command) are one of the primary reasons so many jobs/businesses have left the country.

Who has ever claimed women don't have the right to reproduce? Or are you playing word games in regards to abortion? If so yes, some of us have a problem with a parent having the "choice" to snuff out the live of their child, in the womb or out of the womb.

I gotta hear this one. You can't really be talking about requiring one to identify themselves prior to casting a vote, can you?

 

"Or are you playing word games in regards to abortion?"

Oh, I think we can safely say both sides of the argument play word games on that subject. But you know perfectly well what was meant in this instance - undermining a woman's right to choose.

"You can't really be talking about requiring one to identify themselves prior to casting a vote, can you?"

If it's impossible or extremely difficult for certain people to identify themselves in the way that's required, of course that's an attack on voting rights. You can't really be defending such a system, can you?

 

The right to choose what? Killing an unborn child for convenience? How & in what world could this be considered acceptable?

How difficult is it to get a picture ID? If you can get to the polling station you can get by the BMV to get an ID, right? The single most basic step in voter fraud prevention should be the expectation of identifying yourself prior to casting a vote.

 

Hmmm. My question would be whether the aim is really "voter fraud prevention" or the depression of legitimate voter turnout.

And as for the question of how difficult these things are, the voting process in the US is already far too difficult, as evidenced by voter turnout levels that are abysmally low by international standards. Do you really want to worsen a problem that is already acute?

 

I overlooked the first part of your comment.

"The right to choose what? Killing an unborn child for convenience? How & in what world could this be considered acceptable?"

Now, who was talking about word games earlier? By definition, the pro-choice side do not regard abortion as killing, otherwise they would not be pro-choice. You know that perfectly well.

 

James, Welcome to the forum! Good luck making any sense of the rambling drivel coming from David. A reasoned argument isn't forthcoming by any stretch of the imagination. Far Right-wingers have no need for logic. Ideology replaces the need for it. And wait 'til you meet rlm. He makes David almost sound reasonable...Almost.

 

Let me ask you this, why wouldn't you want someone to establish they are who they say you are prior to casting a vote?

 

In moen-speak, this little rant actually means common sense should never take the place of far left extreme talking points. In time, you'll find Moen is a hate-filled bigot with some very odd beliefs and behaviors. But you'll see.....

 

What word games? Abortion (as birth control) by definition is the snuffing out of an innocent life. If the intent wasn't to end a life why would a "procedure" such as abortion even be necessary?