Doer
Well-Known Member
O
It does make for your fine whine.
Can you live on minimum wage? (Calculator)
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
Doer
Well-Known Member
Do you know you just said, those that don't invade don't make it better for those invaded?
Yes they do. They didn't invade and pillage the country.
Usually make it better....for who? For the invaders? Yeah. That is why you invade.
How is it possible to invade a place and make it better for them. Don't say Iraq or 'Stan. It isn't better. South Viet Nam you mean?
It is better now that there is no South Viet Nam?
WW1` and 2 don't count, We didn't invade, we were defending ourselves.
So, what is this view, that white people make it better....make it better for white people?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
If I had a like button.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
its hard to reply to such broad statements.
do you know what communism is?
like government exists to protect property rights and serve the ruling class.
anyone can see the shiny barbed hook poking out of that statement.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Capitalism:
A system of economics based on the private ownership of capital and production inputs.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
ok thanks i reckon.
but you glossed over cannas point earler which reflects mine as well.
if the gubberment is for the uck ucks by the uck ucks then we are protecting ourselves.
i guess it was wage slavery that peaked my interest here when you said capital class.
i seem to think the capital class is anyone with capital and when you get down to it those capital holders in the middle are hardly the ruling class.
wage slavery happens when you go and volunteer your wages as income. when you do this basiclly you trade rights for benefits of limited liability like bankruptcy protection and shit like that. the bennies are financed from loans on the capital of the tax on these wages labeled as income.
the debt to income grows out of proportion creating the wageslaves.
so if your point is the freedom to volunteer like this is only possible by capitalism then i woulld have to agree.
but if your point leads to calling what happens after this volunteer contract capitalism...i would disagree.
thats another munism. and its really only questionably voluntary on the common civil front.
Last edited:
the answer is in your question:
good wage
good wage does not equal living wage.
Yes, they make the land better for themselves. The land does not care who is living on it, even when the land is misused. Land has no feelings.
North America, for instance, became much more productive with French and British colonists living there.
Australia was improved by the British prisoners.
The British took India out of the middle ages.
Africa was given rail roads, power plants, and other infrastructure.
An exception might be South America. The Spanish took it over when Europe was at the beginning of the enlightenment. Being conquered by a medieval power is different than being conquered by a more enlightened one.
it would not be this way with regular increase to wages for inflation however, rightie fights tooth and nail against it (spending incredible amounts of money through lobby) therefore, it ends up a large increase like the last time..spread over 3 years because the deficit was huge..doesn't that tell you anything?That's why it's a living wage. The person ahead of the curve becomes just like the guy who was behind the curve. All you do is keep shifting the curve forward for burger boy and back for the guy who spent 10 years working his ass off. Until finally you just have a very disproportionate amount of rich to the Kenny poor. There's no such thing as the "middle" class anymore. Yet liberal dumdums complain about the wage disparity.
It's more like an intellectual disparity.
hmmmmm..spending money so.. they.. DON'T ..have to PAY money..yeah..THAT'S the ticket!
historically, employers exploit employees.
60% water..looking inside the human cavity, i can't help but to notice how we look like any other animal we feast upon..wonder who is supposed to be feeding off us?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Really convoluted, and you have run away with it to completely distort a simple and easy to grasp concept.
Capitalism can not exist without a state.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Doer
Well-Known Member
Exactly. Unfettered capitalism is no different than confiscation by thieves.
The State is only for protection of the weak against the thieves.
(I know. Quit pretending to agree.
)
Last edited:
Doer
Well-Known Member
Yet lately, though many don't see it. Employees exploit the employer.
And it is called pilfering and lying about attendance. It is all on the rise.
It is called "getting what you are worth by stealing it."
Not you, of course, dear Sky.
But it is a rampant attitude that the minimum wage is the battle cry. It won't cut down on the stealing. Raising the miminum is stealing other jobs.Making a 30 hr requirement for Health Care instead of 25 hrs, is stealing 3-4 hours a week from many workers,
There are always consequences, the system is so balanced in self rule.
Last edited:
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Alot of people seem to be equating capitalism with what currently exists, which is crony capitalism.
Govt receiving large donations from certain corporations for "special consideration" is not a capitalist or free market principal, infact it is the opposite to a free market.
People give the Republicans ALOT of shit, the Dems are in on the same circle jerk.
Take money out of politics and let a truely free market bloom, and for the lefties that cry about the environment, it belongs to the commons, so in a free market you could still have a scaled back EPA which protects the equal rights of all citizens to the environment.
Govt receiving large donations from certain corporations for "special consideration" is not a capitalist or free market principal, infact it is the opposite to a free market.
People give the Republicans ALOT of shit, the Dems are in on the same circle jerk.
Take money out of politics and let a truely free market bloom, and for the lefties that cry about the environment, it belongs to the commons, so in a free market you could still have a scaled back EPA which protects the equal rights of all citizens to the environment.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
well then your new fortune cookie pitch is spiffy..is there a manufacturer on your town?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
It's better than your convoluted distortion bullshit pitch. Logic goes well with brevity.
the pubs are running into exactly what they feared: the dems have them out-numbered..in essence, the only thing they have going for them is cash and the ability to supress the vote by limiting polling through reduced hours, reduced poll places, reduced voter booths courtesy of republican governors..in my precinct last election cycle stood one (1) voting booth where there used to be dozens..
rick scott made a very big mistake by insulting the intelligence of his constituents and will pay for it this november.
Doer
Well-Known Member
The land is the land and cannot be improved. The culture was plowed under by whites. How is that an improvement? It is the false logic of the slaver.
Same as here. We don't improve the land. We improve ourselves by raping and attempting to harness the land with poisons, now in our food supply, at the expense of those that were as vicious as us, just not quite so organized.
The 'Plains Land" was much better managed by the Lakota Sioux. The white slaughtered the buffalo as an act of war. Bio-cide. Only whites practice bio-cide.
The Everglades are were managed better by the Seminole.
I have no doubt the Zulu could mop the floor with the Vikings, at the same time in history. Too bad the Zulu weren't there to protect Paris.
Last edited: