Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Panthro

Wealth Inequality in America

271 posts in this topic

This bears repeating "you cannot legislate prosperity"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then logically you should support government intervention in order to create full employment; think of it as a universal right to employment. unemployment doesn't exist because everyone that's unemployed refuses to work.

so which would you prefer? higher taxes on the rich to fund government work programs, or, disregarding the constitutionality of the proposal, a legal mandate that the private sector provide real work opportunities to those in search of work? or some other idea? (note: trickle down economics is a fairytale and is not a viable solution)

Not that I particularly like Cantrel's idea here, but nobody actually responded to it. You just went back to the 'people are lazy, you cant give them handouts' line even though that has nothing to do with this post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I particularly like Cantrel's idea here, but nobody actually responded to it. You just went back to the 'people are lazy, you cant give them handouts' line even though that has nothing to do with this post

this is why i usually don't treat posters like hatter or ncbiscuit with respect; neither argue in good faith

there is such inconsistency among the conservatives here. unemployment is high because obummer isn't doing anything, but government can't create jobs. there's no universal right to employment, but if you're unemployed you're a parasite.

capitalism essentially requires unemployment (outside of the fantasy world where perfectly competitive markets exist) and in fact the ruling class prefers artificially high levels of unemployment; they use this to depress wages and create an environment in which employees can't just tell their shitty boss "go fug yourself"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cantrell with real world experience is even funnier...

You're assuming that everyone will work hard if given the chance. That's the problem, as hatter said, with these programs... a lot of ( but not all) people, once they're on them don't give a crap anymore... they're taken care of so why try anymore? Take the handout, be lazy and do whatever you want.

a steady rise in worker productivity along with wage stagnation seems to indicate that there's absolutely no fuging incentive to "work hard"; this of course being irrelevant because you can't provide empirical evidence of your shitty claim that "a lot of people are just lazy"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a steady rise in worker productivity along with wage stagnation seems to indicate that there's absolutely no fuging incentive to "work hard"; this of course being irrelevant because you can't provide empirical evidence of your shitty claim that "a lot of people are just lazy"

If you need "evidence" that people are lazy then youre way dumber than even I thought and that is really saying something.

Have you ever even worked a real job, ie. one outside a classroom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you need "evidence" that people are lazy

this is a straw man. stop being deliberately disingenuous or stop posting

then youre way dumber than even I thought and that is really saying something.

this is ad hominem. defend your (at this point) baseless claim or stop posting

Have you ever even worked a real job, ie. one outside a classroom?

have you ever stood up without breaking a sweat?

see, neither of these questions are relevant to your baseless claim. i don't care about your anecdotes about the lazy guy you met that one time at your job.

i need evidence that:

1) "a lot" of people on government assistance are "just lazy" (your words) and, if you can find that information (you can't because it doesn't exist, though i certainly expect you to shift the goal posts as to what constitutes "a lot" to the point that in fact a very small percentage of assistance recipients meet the criteria), i'm going to also need evidence that:

2) the private sector will provide jobs for those who want a job at either a wage that keeps up with productivity, incentivizing "hard work" (it won't), or at the very least a living wage (it won't)

you don't get to call welfare recipients lazy when the glorious free market has yet to allow for full employment (and of course, never, ever will). as was said earlier, capitalists prefer artificially high unemployment for blatantly obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think you would answer the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is why i usually don't treat posters like hatter or ncbiscuit with respect; neither argue in good faith

there is such inconsistency among the conservatives here. unemployment is high because obummer isn't doing anything, but government can't create jobs. there's no universal right to employment, but if you're unemployed you're a parasite.

capitalism essentially requires unemployment (outside of the fantasy world where perfectly competitive markets exist) and in fact the ruling class prefers artificially high levels of unemployment; they use this to depress wages and create an environment in which employees can't just tell their shitty boss "go fug yourself"

It is amusing that you would actually think that I care what you think about me or my opinions. My opinions, intelligence, and work ethic had resulted in a very successful life (both personally and financially). Your constant bitching about how unfair the system is and how it is others fault for what you don't had had only made you a bitter person and a financial disappointment.

Sur on the sidelines and complain about what others have....the others move on down the road of financial success....and you are still sitting in that same spit on the sidelines.

Enjoy the view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think you would answer the question.

oh no i wouldn't answer an entirely irrelevant question meant to deflect any calls for evidence of your bullshit claims :( :( :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is amusing that you would actually think that I care what you think about me or my opinions. My opinions, intelligence, and work ethic had resulted in a very successful life (both personally and financially). Your constant bitching about how unfair the system is and how it is others fault for what you don't had had only made you a bitter person and a financial disappointment.

Sur on the sidelines and complain about what others have....the others move on down the road of financial success....and you are still sitting in that same spit on the sidelines.

Enjoy the view.

i don't actually think you care about how you're perceived; if you did, you'd stop being such a detestable person

oh and you would take care to make your posts legible when attempting to convince someone that you're intelligent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't actually think you care about how you're perceived; if you did, you'd stop being such a detestable person

oh and you would take care to make your posts legible when attempting to convince someone that you're intelligent

I am posting on a MB....don't really care that much about sentence syntax, grammer, etc here.

As for intellingence....I will absolutely guarantee you that you are not even in the same ballpark as I am.

SAT....1510

Scholarship offers.....Duke, West Point, Northwestern

Graduated with double majors in Acctounting and Economics....3.8 GPA

MBA in International Finance....4.0 GPA and first in my class

I took the academic abilities that I was born with....worked hard in school...and have achieved financial success due to both.

So, keep sitting on the sidelines bitching about how the world is unfair. I will make sure to wave and then give you the finger as I fly past your stagnant ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh no i wouldn't answer an entirely irrelevant question meant to deflect any calls for evidence of your bullshit claims :( :( :(

You won't answer it because we all already know that you sit in your academic ivory tower looking down at the rest of us instead of out in the real world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites