The only hope for this country is democratic socialism & equal redistribution of wealth

reply to post by counterterrorist


And hence my proof.

Your very statement gives the possibility for a dictator to rise.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


What those families have done to get themselves into the top 1% of income is make money from the work of others, almost always going for low salary, high profit corporate structures. If you think that by defending the top you're helping the bottom then you've bought into all the lies corporate marketing has brainwashed society with, and I can only urge you to read more about this issue in the hope that sometime you'll see the reality of how almost all the rich are parasites of almost everyone else. They are accumulating money, energy, which is not flowing in the economy in a free and distributed manner, so inevitably their existance has a negative impact on society.

I won't dispute that there are wealthy people that are nice, and I don't want a system that keeps people from being rich, but somewhere along the lines it's not about being rich anymore and people get exploited.

Cap it high, but cap wealth, and society will work better as long as there is transparancy in the distribution of money and in how it relates to actual work. Owning golden shares is not work.

reply to post by Zepherian


this creates the fear to work. Why work if big brother will just take it away when you get to the top?

reply to post by SUNRAY06


Why not ? I'm sure Somalians or Ethiopians would be more that happy to trade a truck for some food.

Originally posted by Solarskye
I don't have any wealth either, and I don't want a hand out from the rich. I want to know before I die that I did it. I made my way, I payed my bills, I payed for my food, I worked, I played, I laughed and cried all by myself without anyone giving me money or a job. I want to do it my way whether I'm dirt poor or filthy rich. This is what's wrong with the country today. Nobody knows the true meaning of being free. Everyone wants a hand out or government to provide for their well being. They want equal without being as equal to another.

I do not live for false-pretence, pride and ego, I beleive in peace and freedom. I don't think the lies, deception, constant fear mongering, being forced to work to survive, being ignorantly blissful, and the fact that a small group of elite's who control our economic's and world policy equates to freedom in any sense of the word. No sir, I do not wish to be a sheep. As you know, sheep are shepherd into slaughter houses for meat and some are used for wool production. Wow you must then be pretty lucky not to be one of the ones used for meat production? Or are you? They are happy aslong as they have meat to work and you are happy aslong as you have no clue whats going on. Isn't it a loving relationship

reply to post by counterterrorist

Are you seriously insane? So, say you and a friend are in college. You study hard, show up to classes, finish assignments while your friend lies around in the dorm hungover or stoned, rarely goes to class and only seriously applies himself to partying. At the end of the semester, your GPA is a 4.0 and your hapless friend's is a 2.2 (he did have cheat sheets for finals and sent in paid test takers to large classes...) With your theory of equal distribution let's see how that affects you and bong boy's GPA. So, equally distributed now you both have a 3.10... Hope you are happy with the equal distribution, I'm sure bong boy is....There is a reward in life to hard work, innovation and industry and I don't understand why you want to give the fruits of that labor away to any hapless soul with their hand out!

This is not targeted at any one side of this, left or right.

for starters, Centrism makes 110% more sense than arguing eternally and taking things into the silly-zone where the power corrupts us, whether it's a 1984 world or an Animal Farm world or the ultimate right wing wet-dream V for Vendetta world: extremism creates Dystopias.

anyway, a few comments on some silly ideas:

1. without the existence of poverty, there will be no motivation for people to try or to achieve.

BUSTED! it's all relative. A middle class kid remembers his childhood in a duplex in an urban area and is compelled to achieve and get that McMansion on the hill.
in the same way, a kid who was homeless in his childhood for most of it, is compelled to achieve that duplex the middle class kid took for granted.

the elite 1%er kid loathes the thought of ever having to live in a lowly mcmansion on the hill, where all the 'new rich' live.

if anything, absurd wealth destroys creative growth and progress, as they have no imperative in life but to maintain the status quo.

that's how you end up with Paris Hilton.

what I'm saying is: if we stopped major causes of suffering, and if everyone chipped in according to their means, even the very rich and the very poor, people would have the health (physic and mental) to compete in a free market world. that isn't radical redistribution of wealth, that would take the same money as a day in Iraq, which is a voluntary expenditure at best.

a good base level, where peoples most basic needs are assured will only stabilize the free market. if there are no people w/o insurance, we don't have to allocate taxes toward superexpensive life-saving surgeries, when we could pay the minimum for basic preventative. either way, you're gonna pay. period.

why not take the cheap route.

MOST IMPORTANT: by eliminating the poorest classes by ensuring a basic working class above-poverty level, CRIME WILL DROP exponentially.

cost of healthcare will drop, police costs will drop.

if people aren't forced into criminal activity to survive and aren't forced to just drop into hospitals dying, we'd have a budget surplus and a far better quality of life, the whole system wide.

I'm just sayin.

oh, and one last thought: people who live in intense povertu lose the will to try. they eventually become seriously mentally ill. depression, etc.

how do suicidal thoughts, and feelings of hopelessness help motivate anyone?

[edit on 25-6-2008 by MegaTherion]

reply to post by Ismail


not all.

reply to post by LateApexer313


OK buddy, where are you from, I can guarantee it cant touch france and if its the US just.... what.... the... hell I dont think france could ever get as low and inefficient as the US, im not saying you are from there im just comparing.

reply to post by LetsTouch


France nailed itself into its own coffin by abandoning the immigrant population.

I hate how Europeans claim they're better, while their cities burn from injustice.

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Gorman91]

Robin Hood of 2008 WHERE ARE YOU!???

So let me get this straight a minute. You want me to work my ass off so that I can give it to the collective and let someone else manage who gets to benefit from my hard work?

These things rarely work out well, might want to do a little research on socialism. I work my ass off for me and my family, not every other family out there. And I sure as hell do not trust the govt to be the ones to divvy things up, be it money or deciding what job is worth what. So much for capitalism eh?

Benjamin Franklin:
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security

reply to post by MaMaa


Well if the guy next to you is working his ass off for your family, I guess you're quits. Wait ! But that's...unnatural. Why would a stranger care about you ? Maybe because together we are stronger. The belief that we alone can take care of our selves is foolish and arrogant. If a major crisis breaks out (and it looks like it will) people with an individualistic mentality will die first. Killed by others who think just like them.
Bah... Not worth the saliva. People never learn.

reply to post by LetsTouch


And just for info, LateApexer313 France has been right wing for the last 4 presidential mandates. Socialism in France ... I live there. I think I would have heard. And frankly, french socialists don't know what socialism is. They are capitalists, just like the other side. Same over in america...

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Ismail]

reply to post by Ismail



Pure socialism is just as evil as pure Capitalism you know.


You either abandon them or give them a free ride. Both of which are wrong.


We are social beings, but we require an alpha male/female due to how we evolved. so that just goes and takes a big sh*t over pure socialism.

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Gorman91]

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Gorman91]

reply to post by Gorman91


You're not making sense. Capping wealth at the very top won't remove any incentive at the bottom or the middle. Or will you stop working if you lose that one in who knows how many million chance to be a multibillionaire? Fear to work? People will always work if they have a desire or a necessity.

What it does remove is the sociopathic elite at the top, the psychologically deranged that will not be happy untill they own everything and everyone, because you've taken away their power. What it does remove is the possibility of totalitarism, as you've just created a successfull social check and balance for it.

reply to post by Gorman91


True, to some extent. But I believe in man, and I believe we are better than that. I'm neither capitalist, nor socialist. Although if given choice, I would go with the latter. I prefer being screwed by an institution rather than by my fellow man. At least that way I can blame the institution.

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Ismail]

reply to post by Zepherian


And then you have everyone working for equal, which in turn makes people angry that their job is seen as equal to X job, which in turn causes a rant, which in turn causes people to join that rant and form an organization, which in turn causes that organization to grow, which in turn causes them to eventually start bashing those they see as not part of their organization, which in turn replaces the elites with a new one.

tis tis tis for not thinking ahead. C+, see me.

reply to post by Ismail


Socialism is the better, but it must be mixed with capitalism. The government can decide upon the redistribution of wealth if the must, but they should not create equal redistribution of wealth.

A+ for universalism and being open to think on both sides.

[edit on 25-6-2008 by Gorman91]

Exactly. It suppresses competition and motivation. In this model of government, the Socailist/Communist model, 20% have all the money while the other 80% are expected to redistribute their hard-earned money. The top 20% keep their money, yet tell you what to do with yours.

You should not want this, unless you want to be Nursed by the Government.