![]() |
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba" Justabubba: "that would include everyone" http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847 |
| Sponsored Links |
| Red Cross - Donate Today Save the Rainforest |
|
||||
|
[quote]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Society works well, and for the benefit of most, when people are given their merited rewards or punishments. (work well, get a raise, work poorly, get fired). That is because such a system gives everyone the incentive to work well. If everyone in a society works well, that society is better off. But even when all try the best they can, some will do better than others because of greater ability. An analogy: Suppose there were two "societies" of five people. In the first, a socialist society, all five people make $10,000 a year. In the second, a capitalist society, the salaries are respectively $20,000, $40,000, $100,000, $150,000, and $200,000. The socialists of society 1 say "Bad capitalists - the highest earner earns ten times the lowest earner." So is it possible for a society to have a wide "disparity", yet be better off than a socialist society? Yes - and highly simplified, that's what's happened in the 20th/21st centuries.
__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba" Justabubba: "that would include everyone" http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847 |
|
||||
|
How can you support socialism at this point? China has abandoned it, Europe is moving away from it, Venezuela isn't doing so well, and Cuba is a complete failure.
Sounds like a successful system, let's not reward people for their work and rely on the non-existent "good" inside of them to work for nothing. Please give me a break.
__________________
“Good leaders abhor wrongdoing of all kinds; sound leadership has a moral foundation.” -Proverbs 16:12 |
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
[/quote]
This is exactly why it's necessary for a strong central government to step in and manage the dispersion of wealth in order to provide for the needs of society. No, I don't need to be reminded that this management requires a decision-maker to determine the specifics of the needs; that's what the definition of government is and should be.[/quote] You are extremely confused about what the definition of government "should be." The government has been instituted to insure the natural rights and freedoms of its people. It is supposed to rule with the consent of the governed. The government isn't supposed to be stong and centralized. If you want that, then make a time machine, go to 1940 and move to Italy. You would love it. FDR got a lot of his ideas from Mussolini and he actally admired Mussolini very much. "You cannoy help the poor by taking from the wealthy"-Thomas Jefferson. Theres this thing called freedom that this nation was founded on that makes it unique and you are proposing a shift away from that, that the founders of this nation were wrong. It is frightening that people actually think like that. [/quote]How can you support socialism at this point? China has abandoned it, Europe is moving away from it, Venezuela isn't doing so well, and Cuba is a complete failure. [quote] well put |
|
||||
|
If you'll wake up and look at reality, the "rights and freedoms of its people" are provided for in spite of the "consent of the governed." Civil rights laws were never supported by popular demand any more than laws protecting abortion rights were supported by popular opinion. Government must make the difficult decisions that individuals just can't be trusted to make properly on their own.
|
|
||||
|
[/quote] Government must make the difficult decisions that individuals just can't be trusted to make properly on their own.[/quote]
Good luck trying to take guns away from everyone, it won't work out too well.
__________________
“Good leaders abhor wrongdoing of all kinds; sound leadership has a moral foundation.” -Proverbs 16:12 |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|