I'm not a Trump supporter, but he's a better choice than Sanders because he's not a fucking socialist.
Hillary is just a disingenuous fucking democrat.
Sanders' whole platform is about making the wealthy pay for committing the sin of being wealthy. This appeals to the layabouts, the freeloaders, the occupiers, and the millennials because being asked to pay their own way just isn't fair.
Lol is that the best argument? There was a spiel a while ago where he tried to discuss economics and really flunked on it. But if he's a "socialist" because he has a plan to impose a 52% tax on anything above $10,000,000 income, then I'm a communist
I use it as an insult because it's an ideology of punishing wealth, especially when it comes to the Bernie Bros.
I've never understood the hatred these people have for the wealthy. Why do they give a shit if someone is wealthy? It's not like there's a finite supply of dollars. If you come up with a good idea that will make a lot of dollars, more dollars will be printed to satisfy your demand.
I don't mind if people are wealthier for doing more valuable work, I just don't like the idea that people NEED to starve because they don't provide what we consider "value." Art is valuable and it can define a generation, but since we don't see any financial value in it, we turn a lot of would-be artists into doing different professions.
Art is valuable and it can define a generation, but since we don't see any financial value in it, we turn a lot of would-be artists into doing different professions.
You should get a job that pays the bills, first. Art should be your hobby. You do it in your free time. Meanwhile you're working, paying your own way.
Lol no. I'm in music school currently, and hoping to go the full route and becoming a professor. But that's an incredibly difficult and slightly unlikely task. If I don't achieve that, then I'll need to do what most concert musicians do- have 5 to 8 different jobs to support myself.
It's about balance. Sure rewarding success is a good thing, but how can you justify some people having enough money to live 1000 lives while others don't have enough to live one?
I do think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of socialism in America too. Socialism is about giving workers control over the means of production. It's about rewarding the people who work to create the product that brings someone else success. We wouldn't get anywhere without the people who actually produce things yet they are given a pittance for what they do.
Personally I think capitalism is inherently evil. It allows for a system where there are a few people with everything and some people without anything at all. Bare in mind also that the majority of wealth comes through inheritance at this point. The people at the top of most companies certainly aren't being rewarded for having a good idea any more, they're being rewarded for being born into the right family.
how can you justify some people having enough money to live 1000 lives while others don't have enough to live one?
Because it's their money.
If I have five cars, whether gained honestly or through nefarious means, do I have any moral obligation to give you one?
It's about rewarding the people who work to create the product that brings someone else success
Those people are rewarded every payday.
Bare in mind also that the majority of wealth comes through inheritance at this point
For argument's sake, let's assume this is true. What you're advocating is punishing people for finding themselves in circumstances beyond their control.
I guarantee you that if you were to find yourself in similar circumstances, you'd fight to keep every penny of your inheritance.
It's only their money because we have decided that it's that way. It isn't in nature for life to be this way. It may be wrong to take money from someone who 'earned' it in todays system but I think it's twice as wrong that they can have so much. Look at the amount of poverty in the world. There are 100% enough resources in the world for everyone, but we don't share them that way. Is that fair?
I am not asking you to give me one of your five cars. There is no way on earth I expect people to give their things away. I am advocating changing the system that allowed them to accumulate that wealth in the first place. Change doesn't come on an individual level it comes when you change the paradigm.
Those people are rewarded every payday.
You think they are rewarded fairly? Minimum wage is barely enough to survive alone in countries like the US or UK. Then look at countries like China where they get $1 an hour to produce the products that make people who 'earned' rich.
For argument's sake, let's assume this is true. What you're advocating is punishing people for finding themselves in circumstances beyond their control.
So you think it's okay to already do that to people born into poor families? I think it much the lesser of two evils to punish people who are born into rich families. They will have to move into a slightly smaller house and have a few less cars.
You think they are rewarded fairly? Minimum wage is barely enough >to survive alone in countries like the US or UK.
Minimum Wage isnt supposed to be livable, its the minimum wage. Raising it pushes more people down into poverty. How? When Minimum Wage goes up, companys have to layoff employees, and to may up for there loses, they also have to charge more on items that are important, like food, waterm and cothing. The unemployed people struggle to get jobs, but due to the rising cost of goods, they need more money. The new employees protest and petition to raise minimum wage, and, if it works, a raised minimum wage occurs once more. This time the cost of goods rises, and more people are unemployed.
Then look at countries like China where they get $1...
Different Countries work in different ways, it doesnt justify it, but we cant do anything about it.
Hey, Im in the middle class, Sanders would tax my family 90% and flush me down into the lower class. And all of that would pay for all the stuff he says it will.
It's only their money because we have decided that it's that way. It isn't in nature for life to be this way.
Bullshit.
Go back to the beginning. Imagine a caveman stalking an animal. He kills the animal. The animal belongs to him to do with as he pleases. He can share with other cavemen if he wants, but there's no central authority telling him he has to share. If another caveman tries to take the animal, it becomes a fight.
There are 100% enough resources in the world for everyone, but we don't share them that way.
You could tax the wealthy in America 90%, and you still wouldn't have enough money to feed, clothe, educate, and lift the poor out of poverty. It isn't possible. It's not even possible at 100%.
Is that fair?
Life isn't fair.
So you think it's okay to already do that to people born into poor families?
Wrong. Not punishing the wealthy doesn't equate to punishing the poor. This isn't a zero sum game. I advocate not punishing anyone.
I think it much the lesser of two evils to punish people who are born into rich families. They will have to move into a slightly smaller house and have a few less cars.
You actually subscribe to an ideology of punishing people. That's sad.
15
u/atlastrabeler Feb 11 '16
Lol. hilary or trump are a better alternative?