Morality defiled

Dixie said:
LMAO... China's economy is fucked up? That's news to me! Yes, China does have a lot of wealth inequality, and they are one of the oldest societies, which is why I found uscitizens comments so completely inaccurate.

Conservatives, particularly Social Conservatives, have always been in power in America. If you take a look at where we started heading south with our budget deficits and national debt, it was the very liberal social programs of FDR, and LBJ. The instability of our economy is tied directly to this massive national debt, and your idiotic belief that government's job isn't to make a profit, but to make people happy!
Click to expand...

Yep and they have been so democratic and with so much freedom.

dictatorships and police states are one common result of extreme wealth inequality. Some form of psuedo socialism is another.

ie the Castro state, the former USSR, ect.
 
uscitizen said:
Yep and they have been so democratic and with so much freedom.

dictatorships and police states are one common result of extreme wealth inequality. Some form of psuedo socialism is another.

ie the Castro state, the former USSR, ect.
Click to expand...

Well why are you changing points now? You originally stated that wealth inequality results in societal failure, so we need fascist and socialist wealth redistribution to insure against this inequality. When I show you how wrong you are about the 'inequality breeds societal collapse' theory, with the prime example of China, you switch the debate to freedom, liberty, and capitalist economy. WTF? It sounds as if you are draping the principles of Communist Fascist Socialism in the American flag! What a fucking retard!
 
Watermark said:
He believed everyone should worship the state. In that way, he is very similar to modern right wingers.
Click to expand...

Uhmmm.. hate to break it to you Waterhead, but that would be EXACTLY what the Liberal Democrat Party desires, not the modern right-wingers. The Democrats want you to be dependent on the State for your education, healthcare, unemployment, or whatever. They want every American to be bowing at the alter and thanking them daily for these "entitlements" they have doled out to us like unruly children in a candy store.
 
Dixie said:
Well why are you changing points now? You originally stated that wealth inequality results in societal failure, so we need fascist and socialist wealth redistribution to insure against this inequality. When I show you how wrong you are about the 'inequality breeds societal collapse' theory, with the prime example of China, you switch the debate to freedom, liberty, and capitalist economy. WTF? It sounds as if you are draping the principles of Communist Fascist Socialism in the American flag! What a fucking retard!
Click to expand...

No. Sometimes if the totalitarians merely curb their greed for control and profit the rest of us can succeed just fine. Like if they STOPPED shipping jobs overseas, social redistribution schemes would be unnecessary. Globalization and the fear of being utterly priced out of the market through currency tricks make people start demanding the social programs you abhor. It's all like a great chain of being, man.
 
Dixie said:
Well why are you changing points now? You originally stated that wealth inequality results in societal failure, so we need fascist and socialist wealth redistribution to insure against this inequality. When I show you how wrong you are about the 'inequality breeds societal collapse' theory, with the prime example of China, you switch the debate to freedom, liberty, and capitalist economy. WTF? It sounds as if you are draping the principles of Communist Fascist Socialism in the American flag! What a fucking retard!
Click to expand...

Just furthering on the same issue. Not changing my point.
 
uscitizen said:
Just furthering on the same issue. Not changing my point.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, you changed your point.

First you said...
Properly done redistribution of wealth thru good wages , benefits, etc is essiential for a stable society.

If you have a high percentage of the population at the very bottom and a few very rich at the top. This society will not tend to be stable and will not long last.


Then, when I posted the example of China with regard to societies with a large percentage of the population at the bottom and a few at the top, and point out, they are one of the oldest civilizations in existence, with a burgeoning economy... you respond with....

Yep and they have been so democratic and with so much freedom.

dictatorships and police states are one common result of extreme wealth inequality. Some form of psuedo socialism is another.

ie the Castro state, the former USSR, ect.

So, on the one hand, you appear to be advocating Socialist Communist redistribution of wealth like Castro and the former USSR, to insure against the "wealth inequality" and keep society from certain failure... but then you revert back to "freedom and democracy" which is the foundational principles that enable free market capitalism and everything opposed to what you originally espoused.

Capitalism and Socialism don't work well together, they contradict each other in principle. People who are being subjected to 'wealth redistribution' have no desire or motivation to be more capitalistic and earn more wealth, because it will simply be confiscated. Removing Socialistic policies designed to steal from the rich and give to the poor (wealth redistribution) has always proven to increase tax revenues, prosperity and economic growth.

You simply can't do both!
 
China is going to prove to be really interesting over the next decade or two.
But then their people are not lazy and want to work and learn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top