Earth Empires Logo


Verified:

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Nov 14th 2012, 23:37:21

Originally posted by CKHustler:

Claiming natural unemployment=poverty is ridiculous. Even on its face it's ridiculous, but you could take a look at prosperity in other nations and compare it. What is the standard of living in Germany? I've been there and my sister has lived there, it's not near what we have in America. Compare it to any other European nation, compare it to Canada, compare it to whomever you like, standard of living is what capitalism is all about, not employing 100% of the population.
Haha this begs the question what on earth are you talking about when you talk about standard of living. Hooray we have more rich people and a higher GDP, we win capitalism? Because both those countries are pretty prosperous themselves and take better care of their people, so when you start comparing them unfavorably it's clear your priorities are off in la la land, more about dogmatic purity than actual standard of living.

Originally posted by CKHustler:

Your points were worthless, it isn't that I didn't read them, I just rolled my eyes at them. First off, without all these government programs people would actually plan ahead and families would stick together. Second, without the government stealing our money, we would have more to contribute to the charitable organizations of our choice. For an example of charity doing more than government take a look at the "Texas Seed Bill" under Grover Cleveland, back when the government didn't have their hands in everything.
This is a good one. If we stop helping people, institutional poverty will just disappear. Suddenly families are planning ahead and sticking together in places where the cycle of poverty has been in action for decades, all because we've left them to twist in the wind. Again, this is an unrealistic utopia that evidences of your dogmatic fantasies.

Originally posted by CKHustler:
Why would a charity try to run a universal healthcare program? Would not a majority of the population already pay for their own care in a capitalist society? A charity would at most need to handle their local area and only those who came to them for help. Why would you think all these charities would be on a national scale?
People try to pay, but oftentimes, they can't!

Medical bills prompt more than 60 percent of U.S. bankruptcies
http://articles.cnn.com/...th-insurance?_s=PM:HEALTH
If you don't mind people going bankrupt
One part to highlight for you: "Overall, three-quarters of the people with a medically-related bankruptcy had health insurance, they say."

So, you know, maybe that's why? Why is this happening, where are the charities? Poor Germany and Canada, I wonder how they're dealing with this problem.

Originally posted by CKHustler:
As to the great recession(I'm guessing you mean depression), I propose you check out the Hawley-Smoot Tariff, and the expansion of government in the role of creating a 12 year depression. I don't just blame FDR as Hoover was the one that started a bunch of government programs before him.
I asked if poverty existed before those government programs were created. Isn't that what you want to go back to? During the Depression and even before it... was there poverty? A damn lot of it? Even the Irish Potato Famine and all the deaths there - that was capitalism in action. Where's the charity? And then you say "check out the expansion of government in the role of creating a 12-year depression." Yeah, I'll check that out. Wait, what? That's a highly controversial opinion you have based on faith, it's not some fact I can look up.

Edited By: blid on Nov 14th 2012, 23:54:46
Back To Thread
See Original Post
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.