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

[QUOTE=s0beit;28335886]So in other words, there is no proof. Thanks. [/QUOTE] It's called evolutionary/biological altruism, and it does exist. Thanks fact is, as much as you hate socialism, you probably hate even more the fact that the most socialist countries in the world have the highest standard of living. it's funny because all of your posts stink of arrogance, when you have no idea what you're talking about.

so who here likes ayn rand shes my favorite LOL

Governments and Capitalism are both destructive for the people. Either of them only selects a majority who support their power to which they give them rewards for doing so. As we can clearly see by the thread title, it was the man who said "Government is the problem" who then implemented a system so elitist that it only benefits the top. Together with central banks, there will always be more and more poor people to take the shit for the rich. As inflation rise in a given country, so will the amount of money in the elites bank accounts. Would a rich family farther give all his money to the poor or would he give it to his sons and daughters since they are his family? Because the last one would just continue the cycle so they rich families gets more and more and more money as time goes on, not neccersarily because of merit or commitment, but out of simple inherentence.

[QUOTE=s0beit;28337832]Well when it comes down to it really, everything is subjective [/QUOTE] no no no no no no no no no this is the worst thing you could possibly say. we all have the same senses which, more or less, inform our brains of the same basic reality. it is possible to come to reasonably objective conclusions regarding that reality. this is the central idea which has driven human intellectualism for thousands of years and dismissing it is a way for you to reject being held to standards of logical and intellectual conduct basically what you are saying is the remedial philosophy version of "well it's just my opinion"

We all have proof of how well democratic socialism works. There's many countries at the moment using a strong system of democratic socialism and doing great. We've seen mostly capitalistic societies try to exist before, but they can't, or if they do, they subjugate the lower class into the dirt.

[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;28281493]No on average, your typical American will have more disposable income than someone from the UK, Australia, or any other developed country. It is getting worse though and it may not stay that way for long.[/QUOTE] The UK also has a very developed public transportation system, free healthcare via NHS, and (even factoring in the new motion to raise tuition fees to 9000 pounds [~$14,000 USD]), their tuition costs are still much lower on the scale. You could go to a community college on that tuition here, but forget a 4-year school, and unless you have $300,000, you aren't graduating from any of the top schools here. The fact that you provide social aid helps ease the burden on the lower and middle class, and these exact changes are what Congress relentlessly fights against.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;28338780]What's good about Socialism? Well, in what I would consider an ideal society, the government should nationalize all large businesses/industries (Electric companies, oil companies, steelworks, etc.). This would be good because then if say, the oil companies are out for only profit, the people can elect representatives who won't allow them to be so greedy. In addition, the heads of the oil industry wouldn't really have much of a reason to go for profit, as the oil company is managed by a group of people in government, not just the "CEOs" or what have you. [/quote] How are politicians nobler than the CEO of a large company? Are they politicians because they want to do good for people or on the basis of their political clout - with a side-order in helping people. Further, why would any company grow to be "large" under the threat the government would seize their property? [QUOTE=Megafanx13;28338780] When it comes to smaller businesses, they should be intelligently regulated (Ex: making sure the food won't kill you, making sure the facility is clean regularly, etc.). Mostly the stuff we do now. [/quote] Fine enough [QUOTE=Megafanx13;28338780] Also, going back to your statement of "government is a necessary evil". How the hell does that make any sense? I could understand if you were saying "some aspects of our government are necessary evils", but it seems like you're saying the very idea of having a government is evil, which just isn't the case.[/QUOTE] They are. Governments to people advocating socialism serve a different purpose, collective assistance. It is the means to their ends instead of just being there in absence of a better alternative, to people like me. If people could live and never be murdered, robbed, raped and other atrocious crimes without the government, i would be an anarchist hands down. You probably wouldn't need your regulatory controls nor would you have the need to seize businesses in that context. Men would be perfect. Men however, are not perfect. Far from it, that is why governments exist today. If you want a collective force for good under a limited government, you can have it. You just wouldn't be able to collect money in the same fashion (by force). Also I'll state I'm only going to reply to people answering my question as to what is their ideal government, SigmaLambda, this includes you and your condescending nature. Perhaps if you acted less like a jackass people might accept your views with less distaste.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;28332441]It's a very fuzzy form of psychology, almost impossible to say people are greedy naturally since there is no way to determine natural behaviour when everyone is influenced significantly by their upbringing. There is no natural developed mind as to become developed, it had to soak up all the influence from things around it. If anything the natural mind is indifferent to greed as it is an empty shell waiting for something to shape it.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.housmans.com/images/TheSelfishGene.jpg[/img] ;) [editline]28th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SM0K3 B4N4N4;28324532]I find it funny how people think capitalism is the only thing at fault for this huge difference between the top .01% and everyone else. It's not. The reason they have all the money is because they've rigged the system which shouldn't be possible in a government that works. They've been rigging it ever since the turn of the century, and though there have been those that fight against it (some who go to far and believe in an anti-capitalistic ideology that doesn't work and helps dictators get into power) they have been succeeding ever since. I know that most people in this thread are going to accuse me of being a crazy tinfoil conspiracy nut which is sad because that attitude blinds you and forces you to believe the mainstream (which has already shown itself to be misinformed for some strange reason). The reason this exists is because the super rich control the government, and they control it through organizations such as the CFR and Trilateral Commission. If you research the CFR you'll find that almost every major media corporation is part of this group, and they all work together for a single goal. That sounds dangerously close to a single corporation running as a monopoly. But these people aren't just the super rich, they're the financial controllers as well. They run Wall Street which in turn helps run the entire world economy. They run the federal reserve (a private bank who's leaders are in no way chosen democratically or even that influenced by Washington), they also run the banks through the federal reserve. These Bankers as I should call them have been trying for a long time to destroy the US in a plan to create a one world government, and they haven't been completely hiding it either. They meet once a year in meetings with no official name which some in the public call Bilderberg meetings. You know all those protests at the G8 meetings? If as many people knew about the Bilderberg meetings as those they wouldn't be just smashing windows, they'd be causing complete chaos in the streets. These people are actually conspiring to take down the dollar, to prevent the yuan from getting too powerful and to create a world bank that is separate from all the governments and controls the world's finances. Most of you probably won't believe me because you've heard it a thousand times before from some nut job saying all the world leaders are lizard people from the planet ziburu or some crazy tinfoil conspiracy about 9/11 but this is an actual conspiracy, an illegal group of people from nations around the world who meet in secret to form agendas for a sinister purpose. They are the reason things are so bad right now, not capitalism itself. That and Reagan's supply side economics, that was terrible.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=SM0K3 B4N4N4;28324532]These Bankers as I should call them have been trying for a long time to destroy the US in a plan to create a one world government[/quote] [QUOTE=SM0K3 B4N4N4;28324532]These Bankers as I should call them[/quote] Instead of Jews, you mean?

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;28345939]The UK also has a very developed public transportation system, free healthcare via NHS, and (even factoring in the new motion to raise tuition fees to 9000 pounds [~$14,000 USD]), their tuition costs are still much lower on the scale. You could go to a community college on that tuition here, but forget a 4-year school, and unless you have $300,000, you aren't graduating from any of the top schools here. The fact that you provide social aid helps ease the burden on the lower and middle class, and these exact changes are what Congress relentlessly fights against.[/QUOTE] Denmark have the same universal healthcare, no tuitions for college, you get paid for taking college-education, a lot of welfare benefit for the unemployed people (which is economically possible by some pretty effective rules of firing people, who then get transfered into new jobs). The democratic process is pretty good, no dictators here. Taxes start at 39% and extend all the way up to 70-73% as we have a progressive taxing system depending on how much money you have. Of course the U.S. could implement similiar system, the expenses paid for the american military could pay for every single american high school student to get a college education. The american congress, however, is created in such a way that laws that are far reaching take millions of years to pass through, due to several congressional hearings, budget oversights, commissions on commissions, to delay all change there might be. It is interesting as to how long it takes for laws made in the american congress compared to the danish parliment, which only has one chamber (folketinget)

oh hey facepunch didn't know you guys were major political scientists and sociologists and could fix all the world's problems with your never ending wealth of knowledge

[QUOTE=Sockpuppetss;28348632]oh hey facepunch didn't know you guys were major political scientists and sociologists and could fix all the world's problems with your never ending wealth of knowledge[/QUOTE] No one said we can solve anything, but merely us talking of possibilties to solve problems elevates our common knowledge to a higher level. The one saying his system/belief is perfect has misunderstood the point.

[QUOTE=Sockpuppetss;28348632]oh hey facepunch didn't know you guys were major political scientists and sociologists and could fix all the world's problems with your never ending wealth of knowledge[/QUOTE] Yep anyone who isn't a scientist can't share there beliefs in anyway. This would of course be your belief on opinions as well.

[QUOTE=Sockpuppetss;28348632]oh hey facepunch didn't know you guys were major political scientists and sociologists and could fix all the world's problems with your never ending wealth of knowledge[/QUOTE] Oh hey you're an asshole

[QUOTE=Pockets;28340302]Oh, well, as long as those filthy communist didn't get any of it then it's all justified I guess.[/quote]Ugh. I never said anything about it being better that the Soviets didn't get it, merely that it was one of the reasons the US did the operation. [quote]Well yeah, you could probably find one or two federal employees who disapproved of any of the other things I mentioned, too. What does that change? It still happened. I think most people would agree that the government hiring nazis is morally way past uncool, and that it's one incident among many that I think justifies speculation without undeniable evidence. [/quote]The people acquired in Operation Paperclip were not like Mengele or Goebbels. With the possible exception of Hubertus Strughold (who did not carry out human experiments, the most he did was discuss their results, which was still a lot more than any of the other captured scientists knew) Quite a few of them were aware of the things the Nazi party got up to, to various extents (the aforementioned Hubertus probably being the only among them knowing of the concentration camp experiments). Whether or not they supported it is what matters. What could they have done about it? Could von Braun have walked up to Hans Kammler and asked him to stop using slave labour in the manufacture of the V2s? No, he'd probably find himself in the same position as the slave labourers if he was lucky. Did he support the use of slave labour? No. The Nazi party was weaved, forcibly if necessary, into every aspect of the nation at the time. Similar deal as the Pope being a former Hitler Youth; attendance of that particular organisation was made compulsory for all male youth at the time. [quote]Think about it this way: if you're dating someone and they've never been known to have problems with infidelity, then accusing them of infidelity on a hunch would be paranoid. If you're dating someone who has had sex with literally hundreds of other people over your relationship and has gone to ridiculously complex ends to cover it up every time, then accusing them of infidelity on a hunch would be [i]understandable,[/i] at least.[/quote]Not really an applicable analogy. [quote]edit: also i forgot to mention Waco up in my last post, what the dick[/QUOTE]Waco? It was a fuckup, not a malicious slaughter of the sect. You seem to be lumping many things under the same header of government maliciousness, and indeed lumping all corruption cases as a unified case i.e. the entire government is all on the same wavelength. What about Cold War paranoia? Incompetence? In the case of the banks, preventing things from getting worse? The simplest explanations seem to elude conspiracy theorists. In any case, that list of 50's-70's CIA ops and governmental incompetence you listed doesn't back the conspiracy theory about the Bilderberg group and Bilateral Commission.