Until they jack a car and then go joyriding in your neighborhood.
Precisely. Are you? If the answer is no, why would you surrender your moral judgement and choices to something you recognize as amoral?
Secondly, the Free Market does not exist, never has existed, most likely never will. It is a convenient abstraction presumed to have magical power to create efficiencies and allocate resources.
I don’t despise the Free Market, I despise the uses to which this mythical beast is put to.
Since, as it has been pointed out, dickering with minimum wage is useless and SS is in fact counterproductive, I suggest that we return to a system ofpoorhouses.
Wait. Wait. Give me a second here. Think about it.
- Gets these louts off the street.
- Since these institutions are run by states and counties, pares down Big Govt
- Supplies inexpensive labor to industry. Employment compensation is no longer necessary
We did just fine with this system until that bastard FDR came along.
Great Britain was another place that for a long time had real success witha similar idea.
Now that I think about it, why not privatize. Blackwater seems a good choice to build and run this. No need to put it out to competitive bidding.
.
I’m not amoral or completely lacking compassion. However I don’t it’s particularly moral to take what one person has because someone else “needs” it more. Or to put in another way, if I study hard, spend years learning marketable skills and spend years working hard to be successful in my career, why should I be forced to pay for someone else who maybe dropped out of high school and can’t get his shit together? Maybe I would be better off instead of working so hard I should just sit back and let the government take care of me for a change?
People have provided examples like Alabama or Detroit where the entire economy is depressed. Well what good does it do to just throw good money after bad in places like that? By sustaining those unsustainable economies, you take away incentives for people to do things like move to where there are actually jobs. I mean unless you can figure out a way to invest in those communities so they become self sustaining.
If someone offers you a job that pays more money than you are currently making, can you accept it? Can you just arbitrarily sell your house for twice what the local real estate market will bear? The point is not that we live in an absolute free market society, but that all financial transactions are subject to market forces.
Sorry, but I don’t think appeals based on threat of violence are any more valid a reason to assist the poor than appeals based on “need” or “fairness”.
Garbage, Conservatives are sadists and bigots who would re-institute chattel slavery if they could get away with it. Conservatives spend their days relentlessly trying to find ways to hurt and exploit people. They see the poor as something they can stomp on. And children, and women, and the sick, and anyone with a smaller military.
They don’t want to give people the “opportunity to succeed”; they want to use them, to work them until they are crippled or dead in return for barely enough money to avoid starvation ( if that ), and then to discard their victims like garbage. Because that’s exactly what they have always done whenever and wherever they could.
Priceless. Don’t you EVER change, babe. That was the best laugh I’ve had in about a month.
A typical attempt to avoid an actual argument. My opinion of them fits the behavior of conservatives now and in the past, as I’m sure you are aware of; since you can’t argue against me without I and others pointing out just how often conservatives have proved their nastiness you resort to pointing and going “HA HA” like it was an argument.
All disgustingly true but I must admit I LOL. Keep up the good work.
It seems like it would be much more productive to exploit the rich than exploit the poor. Everyone knows the poor are lazy, shiftless lagabouts who won’t give an honest day’s work even under the lash. On the other hand, if we raise the tax rate to 80% for anyone making over $300,000, we will see some real productivity increases. The one thing I know about rich people is they are terrified of being poor, and will work like beavers to avoid it. The more we take, the harder they work. If they were working 60 hours a week, they will work 80 hours to make up the difference. It’s not as if their kids miss them anymore anyway.
You are wrong. Liberals are masochists who intentionally keep poor people poor so the poor people will continue to vote liberals into office. Liberals spend their days thinking of new ways to give money to poor people, so the implicit threat of that money being taken away will insure the liberals political power for years to come. That is exploitation in its grossest form. It’s like not letting slaves learn to read–liberals don’t want poor people to learn how not to be poor.
Liberals don’t give money to poor people out of some generosity or some moral sense, it is only to advance their own agendas. Liberals see poor people as a means to an end instead of an end unto themselves. Poor people are not people to a liberal. Conservatives think that everyone should be treated like a human being. Liberals have always done all of this whenever and wherever they could for as long as they could.
Looks like everyone’s up from their afternoon nap.
Yep. How about raising the capital gains tax to the level the rest of the civilized world deems fair. Reinstating the so-called “death tax” to 100% of anything over ?M. Can't say I'm a Trump fan but I liked his idea of a one-time 15% claw-back of net worth over ?m.
Of course, this really isn’t exploitation, it’s restitution.
Restitution for what exactly?
A lot of them give money to tax lawyers. They’re lucky we wait till they’re dead.
While I probably disagree with Der Trihs as much as you do, I couldn’t help but notice this. Liberals intentionally keep poor people poor. Liberals spend their days thinking of new ways to give them money.
I don’t think you can necessarily use both of those arguments at the same time.
Not from around here, are you, boy?
My mother was poor. She didn’t feel “stomped” on.
I was also poor. I didn’t feel “stomped” on either during that time.
If one is poor, it is certainly within his right to feel stomped on if he absolutely insists on feeling that way. However, I don’t think it’s the most productive mode of thought.
Generations of theft, “legal” or otherwise. Newcomers for gaming the system. If those don’t fly, just because.
I’d say “the temerity to improve their lot” would be a good charge.
Wow. This has got to be one of the coldest statements I’ve seen from you in a while, Shodan. Society may “function”, while people die?
Not if we let them eat cake.*
*[sub]Sorry, I just couldn’t resist[/sub] 
So if you were poor and I gave you $1 you would no longer be poor?