New Data Shows Just How Unequal Wealth Has Become in the U.S. Since the 80s - Polidicks

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28293170]So pharmaceuticals who have scientists on contract to not disclose their discoveries outside of the company and have full rights to their discovery don't exist in your world how?[/QUOTE] Yes because a non-disclosure agreement in a scientist's eyes means he will damn millions of people to death without any forethought.

[QUOTE=s0beit;28293217]Yes because a non-disclosure agreement in a scientist's eyes means he will damn millions of people to death without any forethought.[/QUOTE] the product can't legally make it outside and we both know the us court system would go to town on him and rule in favour of big money on this.

[QUOTE=Pockets;28291111]It's kinda hard to raise their taxes when they're the ones who control whether or not their taxes get raised.[/QUOTE] Thus why it hasn't been done :ironicat:

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28293226]the product can't legally make it outside and we both know the us court system would go to town on him and rule in favour of big money on this.[/QUOTE] Really, you do? What kind of political body or corporate entity would actively defend hiding the cure to aids from the world, really? It would be suicide for politicians and businesses alike. Who says he even needs to do it publicly, what if he just leaked it to wikileaks? Dilemma solved.

[QUOTE=s0beit;28293238]Really, you do? What kind of political body or corporate entity would actively defend hiding the cure to aids from the world, really? It would be suicide for politicians and businesses alike. Who says he even needs to do it publicly, what if he just leaked it to wikileaks? Dilemma solved.[/QUOTE] I have a feeling in a capitalistic world, wikileaks would be shut down pretty fast by big money rather than by big government. Frankly, you're defending breaking contract and rules with big business, something I never thought we'd argue over from this angle. I honestly doubt it would even get as far as public knowledge of it. Big money. Big fucking money.

[QUOTE=Bepo5;28292646]Truly if humans were ants and governments were not greedy and corrupt, communism is the perfect system. Sadly it's always the governments who get greedy and fuck brilliant plans like this up. Sadly without fail, every single time this is tried the government gets greedy, steals from the people far too much, and completely fucks the whole plan up, from the USSR to [B]cuba[/B].[/QUOTE] Just at the last part here, Cuba is really just fucked six ways from sunday; they have shit all in the way of natural resources, and there's huge trade sanctions placed on them by the US. Their condition has nothing to do with communism. One thing Cuba does have is lots and lots of good doctors. Given natural resources and a good GDP I think Cuba could really do some good for the whole world.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28293294]I have a feeling in a capitalistic world, wikileaks would be shut down pretty fast by big money rather than by big government. Frankly, you're defending breaking contract and rules with big business, something I never thought we'd argue over from this angle. I honestly doubt it would even get as far as public knowledge of it. Big money. Big fucking money.[/QUOTE] Non-disclosure agreements and intellectual property rights I have never really been a fan of personally. There is a difference, to me, between capitalism and corporatism which is basically the government assisting large corporations by giving them leeway in matters such as this. I'm for deregulation sure, but deregulation isn't [i]always[/i] bad (and more specifically I'm for getting the government out of business altogether), it also includes nifty things like ending corporate welfare, not allowing corporations to influence government or set their own terms and things of that nature. (eminent domain is also a big bitch of mine) The difference between a free market capitalist and a corporatist are that corporatists often believe corporations should be entitled to the rights of individuals because they represent a party of individuals while i don't think this is true at all. [editline]e[/editline] Frankly, i hate corporations and the way they are running wild in our times as much as the rest of you, i just present alternative solutions to the problem, like taking away all subsidy, tax breaks and assistance (legal or otherwise) the government offers them to cripple what over extending power they have.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28292659]my favourite realization of this thread is that people like Strider think the state of the country is a good thing, with such disparity of wealth.[/QUOTE] He doesn't like it, he's just tacking the blame onto something else.

wait what

[QUOTE=Habsburg;28293364]He doesn't like it, he's just tacking the blame onto something else.[/QUOTE] He's defending a system that made it bad, and is suggesting an even worse one in it's place just... well, I don't know why he is, it's retarded. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=s0beit;28293332]Non-disclosure agreements and intellectual property rights I have never really been a fan of personally. There is a difference, to me, between capitalism and corporatism which is basically the government assisting large corporations by giving them leeway in matters such as this. I'm for deregulation sure, but deregulation isn't [i]always[/i] bad (and more specifically I'm for getting the government out of business altogether), it also includes nifty things like ending corporate welfare, not allowing corporations to influence government or set their own terms and things of that nature. (eminent domain is also a big bitch of mine) The difference between a free market capitalist and a corporatist are that corporatists often believe corporations should be entitled to the rights of individuals because they represent a party of individuals while i don't think this is true at all. [editline]e[/editline] Frankly, i hate corporations and the way they are running wild in our times as much as the rest of you, i just present alternative solutions to the problem, like taking away all subsidy, tax breaks and assistance (legal or otherwise) the government offers them to cripple what over extending power they have.[/QUOTE] when you put it that way, our views land a lot closer together. Though, proper and intelligent regulation is almost always a good thing.

or when it does get out they manipulate the press in such a way as to make it come off as a fringe conspiracy theory.

Oh my.

Just make a government that is so centralized and strong that it can tax the rich without the rich trying to fuck with it.

Capitalism would be great if reality wasn't so god damn unfair.

But this has always been the case in America, it was in the 1920's and it is now.

[QUOTE=Bepo5;28292646]Truly if humans were ants and governments were not greedy and corrupt, communism is the perfect system. Sadly it's always the governments who get greedy and fuck brilliant plans like this up. Sadly without fail, every single time this is tried the government gets greedy, steals from the people far too much, and completely fucks the whole plan up, from the USSR to cuba to really any socialistic system you look at. It truly is the perfect plan on paper, but doesn't take into account human greed and emotion. If all humans were equal and ants, it would work perfectly. To make it work you have to take the human emotion and brain out of the human.[/QUOTE] Except that's not what communism is (in its purest form) at all. People always assume that being equal means being ants, being complete clones of each other and the likes. This is totally wrong. What Marx meant by saying that everyone would be equal is that everyone would have the same amount of rights, no minorities would be oppressed, etc. His idea of communism is completely different and sometimes misjudged by a lot of historians as a "utopia" where everyone are clones and always have a fake smile plastered on their face. The reality of things is that it's no different than many other economic systems, it's just that there is no government, and you can do pretty much whatever you set your mind to. You create your own main life objective but always have the people as your secondary. And if everyone remains with this exact mindset we would be a much more successful race full of new inventions and prosperity. In short, communism does not mean the human race will just be a bunch of clones of each other that achieve nothing. And yes, it IS possible if you want it to be. It's out of many people's confront zone so obviously it's easier to just say "it will never work".

I'm all for hard work and people really do have all the right to their money provided they earned it legitly. The system is there and exploiting it for all it's worth is simply strategy and luck. But when you are earning million upon millions, what the hell do you need all that money for? It's just common sense to me that to give back to the society that helped you get up to that point unless you get off on the feeling that you're keeping fellow country poor. Having an income means you're taking money from someone else. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] Also, in terms of innovation and invention, isn't it shown in a number of studies that money is not a good motivator for complicated cognitive tasks?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28293109]Another excellent post. The people who say they'll never do this are idiots, they do it. They've done it. this is how pharmaceutical works.[/QUOTE] Exactly, the first person to find a cure for cancer with few side effects or at least bareable side effects will be the richest, happiest man alive. So damn happy AS HAPPY AS A GOD DAMN PIG IN SHIT

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28292412]For sure, I just had to point out though, he's the single most ignorant person i've ever met when it comes to art. I don't call myself a history buff for nothing, nor an art history buff, but just hearing that russian constructivism as an art style never happened because communism? It's like a torrent of stupidity.[/QUOTE] That's never what I said. I never said art never came out of Soviet Russia. Here I'll post what you raged to me in a private message: [quote=humanabyss]are you so ignorant of art and history that you declare the existence of russian constructivist art and the fucking hundreds and hundreds of artists spawned in that movement? You're ignoring so much. I know this is late, but I'm an art student, I know art history, and I know how wrong you are and I know you still think you know more about art and history, capitalism, reality, than all of us, and why that is is well beyond me. You ignore shit that the rest of us know, but act like that shit doesn't exist. seriously? [/quote] You're really missing the point, as I said earlier art will exist anywhere. Now the best way for art to spread however is through capitalism. My point was that there were far more artists and professional intellectuals in the United States because of an economic system that supports and harbors their work. In the absence of capitalism when there is no means for an artist to market their work they must rely on the charity of a patron or that of the bureaucracy. Many if not all of the famous artists you and I are familiar of from the renaissance Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Donatello, ect were all funded by powerful patrons who in the long run controlled what work they could produce. And in Russia it was no different.... excuse me for Wikipedia: [quote=wikipedia]By the 1980s, Gorbachev's policies of Perestroika and Glasnost made it virtually impossible for the authorities to place restrictions on artists or their freedom of expression. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the new market economy enabled the development of a gallery system, which meant that artists no longer had to be employed by the state, and could create work according to their own tastes, as well as the tastes of their private patrons. Consequently, after around 1986 the phenomenon of Nonconformist Art in the Soviet Union ceased to exist.[/quote] You really need to chill out brother and work on your critical reading skills. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28292659]my favourite realization of this thread is that people like Strider think the state of the country is a good thing, with such disparity of wealth.[/QUOTE] I don't actually, we've striven too far away from true capitalism. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=U.S.S.R;28292328]They don't have to want to adapt to adapt you know, force works too. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] Also, for you "Durr soviet is teh cools" bigots Communism does not equal Facism, Communism is where every man/woman works toward a greater goal to benefit everyone (Unlike capitalism where everyone works for themselves though most of the time it is just to patent cheap labor), most people think Communism is bad because it is associated with China and soviet Russia.[/QUOTE] And who determines the greater goal? Why should my work and my life be held in slavery to the direction that society forces me to take? Everyone SHOULD work for themselves, this is where your and my morals are at ends. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=hypno-toad;28293298]One thing Cuba does have is lots and lots of good doctors. Given natural resources and a good GDP I think Cuba could really do some good for the whole world.[/QUOTE] Haha, whatever dude. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6ZH1ps20WA[/media] [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28293294]I have a feeling in a capitalistic world, wikileaks would be shut down pretty fast by big money rather than by big government. Frankly, you're defending breaking contract and rules with big business, something I never thought we'd argue over from this angle. I honestly doubt it would even get as far as public knowledge of it. Big money. Big fucking money.[/QUOTE] Big money would have no power over an entity like Wikileaks other than through the fusion of government and corporation which we have today and if I understand correctly both me and s0beit are against.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28301427] Haha, whatever dude. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6ZH1ps20WA[/media] [/QUOTE] That video is incredibly biased.

[QUOTE=Micr0;28302064]That video is incredibly biased.[/QUOTE] And Moore's films are not? And how so, defend your claim... [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jabberwocky;28294985]Having an income means you're taking money from someone else.[/QUOTE] Money is not a static thing, this is where you are ignorant. Life and capitalism is not a zero sum game.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28302089]And Moore's films are not? And how so, defend your claim... [/QUOTE] Moore's films are also biased. That reporter is obviously against socialized healthcare and he shows all of the signs of being some uneducated idiot who beleives that universal healthcare is "COMMUNISM" His proof of healthcare in Cuba being bad is just as unreliable as Moore's proof of them having good healthcare.

has anyone posted the obligatory "everyone should be equal nobody should have more money than [del]me[/del] anybody else communism is so great heil hitler!!!!" shit yet

My unemployed room mate makes more money than I do having a job. And all he does is smoke pot and play bad company 2 on his PS3. Isn't just distribution of wealth between the incredibly rich and the impoverished, it's the working class folks getting unfair balances between themselves as well.

when the fuck did you get mod banned? what is going on

[QUOTE=Micr0;28302191]That reporter is obviously against socialized healthcare and he shows all of the signs of being some uneducated idiot who beleives that universal healthcare is "COMMUNISM"[/QUOTE] Whoa brother, I'm sure we can all agree that John Stossel is one of the greatest reporters of all time.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28302452]Whoa brother, I'm sure we can all agree that John Stossel is one of the greatest reporters of all time.[/QUOTE] I'm not familiar with American reporters. From what I've seen so far, this guy seems like your typical conservative out to demonize anything that shows any sign of socialism.

[QUOTE=Micr0;28302534]I'm not familiar with American reporters. From what I've seen so far, this guy seems like your typical conservative out to demonize anything that shows any sign of socialism.[/QUOTE] He's a fiscal conservative yes. You realize there are reporters out there to demonize anything that shows any sign of capitalism as well right?

[QUOTE=Strider*;28302648]He's a fiscal conservative yes. You realize there are reporters out there to demonize anything that shows any sign of capitalism as well right?[/QUOTE] Yep. I don't trust them either.

[QUOTE=Melnek;28294981]Except that's not what communism is (in its purest form) at all. People always assume that being equal means being ants, being complete clones of each other and the likes. This is totally wrong. What Marx meant by saying that everyone would be equal is that everyone would have the same amount of rights, no minorities would be oppressed, etc. His idea of communism is completely different and sometimes misjudged by a lot of historians as a "utopia" where everyone are clones and always have a fake smile plastered on their face. The reality of things is that it's no different than many other economic systems, it's just that there is no government, and you can do pretty much whatever you set your mind to. You create your own main life objective but always have the people as your secondary. And if everyone remains with this exact mindset we would be a much more successful race full of new inventions and prosperity. In short, communism does not mean the human race will just be a bunch of clones of each other that achieve nothing. And yes, it IS possible if you want it to be. It's out of many people's confront zone so obviously it's easier to just say "it will never work".[/QUOTE] I'd like to hear what you believe is the "ideal" when it comes to communism, not being sarcastic or anything I'd just like to know, honestly. I will say this however: From an outside observer, i don't think everyone is worried that everyone under communism will be drones, at least I'm not. You can't stop people from being people no matter what economic system you put then under. I will say this though, I've always found forms of communism (depending on which you choose) to be impractical to impossible each on their own level. John Stossel is also pretty cool