Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 151 to 175 of 175

Thread: NYT Expose On Chinese Working Conditions In Apple Factories - Microeconomic Help Please

  1. #151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    You tell me, how are we better off than 1912?
    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp
    I never said we're worse off than 1912. I said we are not significantly better than 1912. In 1912 a full days worth got you just enough of the basics for you to afford to make it back to work the next day.
    It doesn't matter how much you cut back, you can't go back to 1912. You still need a home, car, food, and clothes nomatter what.
    "just enough to get back" is not the same as "I get to save 20% of my salary".
    And why 80%/20%? Why not 99/1?
    Like I said, I know people who lived and still live on less than $1500 a month. That is, less than $20,000 a year.
    So I don't know what you're talking about when you say you need $40,000 a year just for basics.
    Unless you have a major medical problem or a great amount of debt, which is not common or average anyway, I'd love to see what you're talking about.

    In both cases, NOT WORKING IS ALWAYS WORSE, so that's your motivation. The only exception may be, that today's world we reward people free food and possibly free housing if they don't work, but feel free to do that. You have yet to offer me ONE EXAMPLE OF ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $40,000 a year "basic living" you allegedly spent. Of course, even you could concede that if you didn't go to school or didn't spend the luxuries on cable, internet, you might have you expense down by another $5,000. So, find me ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $30,000 a year quality of life without having to work.
    Last edited by onlyrp; 02-18-2012 at 05:54 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    "just enough to get back" is not the same as "I get to save 20% of my salary".
    And why 80%/20%? Why not 99/1?
    Like I said, I know people who lived and still live on less than $1500 a month. That is, less than $20,000 a year.
    So I don't know what you're talking about when you say you need $40,000 a year just for basics.
    Unless you have a major medical problem or a great amount of debt, which is not common or average anyway, I'd love to see what you're talking about.

    In both cases, NOT WORKING IS ALWAYS WORSE, so that's your motivation. The only exception may be, that today's world we reward people free food and possibly free housing if they don't work, but feel free to do that. You have yet to offer me ONE EXAMPLE OF ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $40,000 a year "basic living" you allegedly spent. Of course, even you could concede that if you didn't go to school or didn't spend the luxuries on cable, internet, you might have you expense down by another $5,000. So, find me ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $30,000 a year quality of life without having to work.
    Of the people I know making $20,000, almost all of them live with their parents. You can't afford a place in Connecticut on $20,000. I used to make $20,000-$30,000 when I went to college, lived with my parents, and I had no car payments. Still that money didn't last me long. The only person I know who makes that little money and has my own place is my bother who lives in L.A. And he needs help periodically from my parents to pay his bills.

  4. #153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    Of the people I know making $20,000, almost all of them live with their parents. You can't afford a place in Connecticut on $20,000. I used to make $20,000-$30,000 when I went to college, lived with my parents, and I had no car payments. Still that money didn't last me long. The only person I know who makes that little money and has my own place is my bother who lives in L.A. And he needs help periodically from my parents to pay his bills.
    Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I appreciate it.
    Car payment is for people who chose to buy a $20,000 car.
    I chose to buy a car less than $5,000. And it lasted me 5 years. I did this twice.
    So over a period of 10 years, I spend $10,000 on cars. And need to buy another one.
    But a person who chose to buy a $20,000 car, would've paid $25,000 or more in 6 years. I hope they keep the same car for 20 years. Again, it's all about the choices you make. Some even chose to lease cars if they want to switch one every 3 years.
    Can you think of anybody who doesn't live with parents and lives on $20,000?
    Are they debt free, independently wealthy?

    When you say your brother "has his own place" you mean just not living with parents , but he probably still shares a room, right?

    Now, back to the communists. Which communist country gives every child a free place to live once they hit 18 years old, and food?
    Last edited by onlyrp; 02-18-2012 at 06:15 PM.

  5. #154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I appreciate it.
    Car payment is for people who chose to buy a $20,000 car.
    I chose to buy a car less than $5,000. And it lasted me 5 years. I did this twice.
    So over a period of 10 years, I spend $10,000 on cars. And need to buy another one.
    But a person who chose to buy a $20,000 car, would've paid $25,000 or more in 6 years. I hope they keep the same car for 20 years. Again, it's all about the choices you make. Some even chose to lease cars if they want to switch one every 3 years.
    Can you think of anybody who doesn't live with parents and lives on $20,000?
    Are they debt free, independently wealthy?

    When you say your brother "has his own place" you mean just not living with parents , but he probably still shares a room, right?

    Now, back to the communists. Which communist country gives every child a free place to live once they hit 18 years old, and food?
    My brother has his own studio. He works a lot out of home too, so he can't have a bad roommate if he had one. He makes roughly $20,000 a year. But needs help to pay the bills. Get this, he still pays over $3,000 in taxes. Why is the government taking money from someone who makes only $20,000 year and works long hours?

    You made good deals on cars but that is difficult to do. Many people who buy cheap used cars end up having it break down on them.

    My brother is the only one I can think of that lives on his own on $20,000. The only reason he does is because he is in the entertainment industry and has to be in L.A. He has a lot of student loan debt I believe.

  6. #155

    Default

    The country has an insane amount of manufacturing. There are more than a billion people. They have something like 20 cities with more than 10 million people. I wonder why they don't leave and find something else? Are they actually slaves, or are they just desperate?
    Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

  7. #156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    My brother has his own studio. He works a lot out of home too, so he can't have a bad roommate if he had one. He makes roughly $20,000 a year. But needs help to pay the bills. Get this, he still pays over $3,000 in taxes. Why is the government taking money from someone who makes only $20,000 year and works long hours?

    You made good deals on cars but that is difficult to do. Many people who buy cheap used cars end up having it break down on them.

    My brother is the only one I can think of that lives on his own on $20,000. The only reason he does is because he is in the entertainment industry and has to be in L.A. He has a lot of student loan debt I believe.
    The government isn't purposely singling out his income, everybody is taxed 10% minimum, and between 10-25% overall.
    I had to repair my cars, which was inconvenient, but not fatal or dangerous. If you don't want a used car, just try to keep your car as long as you can, which still means keep it until it breaks down, typically that's 10 years minimum.

    I can see why Connecticut's living is expensive, the whole state's population density is comparable to King County, WA (700 vs 900 per sq mi)
    I beleive you when you say he has student loan debt, that's just another choice he made. The same is true for people who buy houses, when you do something that costs a lot of money with expectation of making money, you're taking risk, and that goes beyond "basics" and "necessities".

    If he doesn't like what he does, how much he's paid, he can try to find a better occupation, that's capitalism, he's paid what he's worth on the market. He can ask for more if he's less replaceable, but they better not know of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities. At his income, he might even qualify for low-income houses (this is not section 8), they're small one room apartments with a bathroom for $500-600 a month. They're located in downtown LA (they call them lofts).

    You do make a good point, that he's basically just getting by and still not making enough to pay his expenses, if he gets money from parents to pay bills, why not just move back home? If your parents are sending money to him for bills anyway, might as well pay for his food and let him live at home. I know why this isnt considered, because he doesn't want it, your parents don't want it, and he thinks he can make more later, and he's probably right. These are choices you make.

  8. #157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by libertybrewcity View Post
    The country has an insane amount of manufacturing. There are more than a billion people. They have something like 20 cities with more than 10 million people. I wonder why they don't leave and find something else? Are they actually slaves, or are they just desperate?
    they can be slaves BECAUSE they were desperate, and this is why they have a 1 child policy (I am guessing), imagine how much worse the situation would be if they didn't!

  9. #158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    The government isn't purposely singling out his income, everybody is taxed 10% minimum, and between 10-25% overall.
    I had to repair my cars, which was inconvenient, but not fatal or dangerous. If you don't want a used car, just try to keep your car as long as you can, which still means keep it until it breaks down, typically that's 10 years minimum.

    I can see why Connecticut's living is expensive, the whole state's population density is comparable to King County, WA (700 vs 900 per sq mi)
    I beleive you when you say he has student loan debt, that's just another choice he made. The same is true for people who buy houses, when you do something that costs a lot of money with expectation of making money, you're taking risk, and that goes beyond "basics" and "necessities".

    If he doesn't like what he does, how much he's paid, he can try to find a better occupation, that's capitalism, he's paid what he's worth on the market. He can ask for more if he's less replaceable, but they better not know of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities. At his income, he might even qualify for low-income houses (this is not section 8), they're small one room apartments with a bathroom for $500-600 a month. They're located in downtown LA (they call them lofts).

    You do make a good point, that he's basically just getting by and still not making enough to pay his expenses, if he gets money from parents to pay bills, why not just move back home? If your parents are sending money to him for bills anyway, might as well pay for his food and let him live at home. I know why this isnt considered, because he doesn't want it, your parents don't want it, and he thinks he can make more later, and he's probably right. These are choices you make.
    The entertainment industry is in L.A. If he moves back home he has to give up his career and probably go back to college...and chose a less enjoyable career.

    His financial situation is pretty much standard for anyone just starting in the entertainment industry. They pay the stars big bucks, and everyone else gets peanuts. I don't think you can doubt anyone in his situation is basically a slave.

    A couple years ago when he first started, he understood the financial situation because he just started. But now he is experienced, and can do his job better than almost anyone, including his boss. So now its just a matter of getting an opportunity of getting a movie where he is in charge. Anyone who's started out in an industry knows its tough to get work when you don't have big time experience listed on your resume. People always want to hire people who have done it before. Most people don't like to take chances.

    I'm sorry but nobody making under $30,000 should be paying any taxes. I don't understand why the government needs money from poor people so bad.

  10. #159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Ruffneck View Post
    So just because something was OK 200 years ago it's OK now?
    Show your disdain by not giving Apple any cash , if you do want apple products just buy second hand - theres a flood of second hand sales every 6 months when the sheep run off to buy the latest thingamabob.
    What are you talking about? Unless someone is putting a gun to their head, they don't have to be working for Apple. Ask yourself, "why do they?".
    What I say is for entertainment purposes only!

    Mark 10:45 The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many.

  11. #160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    The entertainment industry is in L.A. If he moves back home he has to give up his career and probably go back to college...and chose a less enjoyable career.

    His financial situation is pretty much standard for anyone just starting in the entertainment industry. They pay the stars big bucks, and everyone else gets peanuts. I don't think you can doubt anyone in his situation is basically a slave.

    A couple years ago when he first started, he understood the financial situation because he just started. But now he is experienced, and can do his job better than almost anyone, including his boss. So now its just a matter of getting an opportunity of getting a movie where he is in charge. Anyone who's started out in an industry knows its tough to get work when you don't have big time experience listed on your resume. People always want to hire people who have done it before. Most people don't like to take chances.

    I'm sorry but nobody making under $30,000 should be paying any taxes. I don't understand why the government needs money from poor people so bad.
    If he's a slave, he's one by choice, because like you said, he has options, he just enjoys what he's doing.
    I meant he can move back home and stop working, for which he'll only require a room and food, no transportation, your parents would pay less and he'd spend less.
    You are right, that his industry is high risk and everybody starts low, he nonetheless chose it, so that's the price you pay for choosing one job over the other.

    hey, did you find that communist country that'll give him or you a roof and food yet?

  12. #161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    hey, did you find that communist country that'll give him or you a roof and food yet?
    True enough - for a country to be truly communist, or socialist (in deed, not meaningless labels), the government would have to have a track record of taking from one class and giving food, clothing, shelter and money to able-bodied adults of another class. That might be China, but the redistribution there is skewed, as the productive classes only subsidize the ruling party elites (less than 10% of China's population are members of the Communist Party). I think there are probably better examples of wannabe communism or socialism out there. Somewhere in the world. If we looked hard enough. Like China, it might be a case of mislabeling. A lot of that going around.

  13. #162
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    USA-the SEMI-FREE society
    Posts
    231

    Default

    The real problem lies with the Chinese government and its monetary policy.

    If they stop practically pegging their currency to the US Dollar by buying our debt, their currency would rise and the Chinese people purchasing power would increase.

    When their purchasing power increase, they could buy more stuff and their standard of living would rise. When that happens, they wouldn't work in shitty conditions because they're comfortable and companies would have to reinvest their profit to make better working conditions.

  14. #163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    If he's a slave, he's one by choice, because like you said, he has options, he just enjoys what he's doing.
    I meant he can move back home and stop working, for which he'll only require a room and food, no transportation, your parents would pay less and he'd spend less.
    You are right, that his industry is high risk and everybody starts low, he nonetheless chose it, so that's the price you pay for choosing one job over the other.

    hey, did you find that communist country that'll give him or you a roof and food yet?
    I'm not an expert in communist countries, I was just stating in theory you get the basics provided for you. Actually most of the "communist" countries have converted to a capitalist system and actually have less rules and regulations than we do. In today's modern world, the U.S. is the communist country.
    Last edited by tttppp; 02-18-2012 at 10:44 PM.

  15. #164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    I'm not an expert in communist countries, I was just stating in theory you get the basics provided for you. Actually most of the "communist" countries have converted to a capitalist system and actually have less rules and regulations than we do. In today's modern world, the U.S. is the communist country.
    Wait, so you start by complaining that you can't afford more than basics with your salary, then I made you admit you can save 20% of your salary.
    You then gave me an example of your brother, who lives in Los Angeles by himself, making half as much as you did, and gets by with some help.
    You start by complaining this country might as well be communist because you're working like a slave, ignoring all the choices you were given and allowed to make, but now you admit you are not a communist expert and can't give me EVEN ONE EXAMPLE of a country which can give you the basics without work.

    So, now is the time to admit, there is no law in nature or by man, that says one must be given the basics at ANY amount of labor, that's what the market is for. If you don't like how much you need to work to make ends meet, feel free to move to a country that's better. I don't doubt we can be much more free than we are, but we are far from communist and if there's a country which as better quality of life for less work I'd consider moving there, unless there's something else that I find valuable where I live, in which case, that's what I am paying for.

    You are starting to sound like you're never going to be happy unless you get everything you want and then some.
    Why should you save 80% of your salary? Why not 100%? Why not have basics given to you?

  16. #165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    Wait, so you start by complaining that you can't afford more than basics with your salary, then I made you admit you can save 20% of your salary.
    You then gave me an example of your brother, who lives in Los Angeles by himself, making half as much as you did, and gets by with some help.
    You start by complaining this country might as well be communist because you're working like a slave, ignoring all the choices you were given and allowed to make, but now you admit you are not a communist expert and can't give me EVEN ONE EXAMPLE of a country which can give you the basics without work.

    So, now is the time to admit, there is no law in nature or by man, that says one must be given the basics at ANY amount of labor, that's what the market is for. If you don't like how much you need to work to make ends meet, feel free to move to a country that's better. I don't doubt we can be much more free than we are, but we are far from communist and if there's a country which as better quality of life for less work I'd consider moving there, unless there's something else that I find valuable where I live, in which case, that's what I am paying for.

    You are starting to sound like you're never going to be happy unless you get everything you want and then some.
    Why should you save 80% of your salary? Why not 100%? Why not have basics given to you?
    I don't need to find an example of a better country to prove this country isn't run right. If this country was run correctly, our standard of living should be significantly higher than 1912. Based our discussion, it seems that 1912 is actually quite comparable to 2012. This shouldn't be the case. If this were a true market, the standard of living should be far and away better than 1912. Industries such as cars, planes, education, health care, etc are all shit. Imagine how much better things would be if the government got out of the way. Thats the point I'm getting at. I'm surprised someone who is apparently a Ron Paul supporter would be defending the status quo the way you are. Honestly you sound like an Obama supporter (no offense), everything is shitty but there's nothing you can do about it. It this failed philosophy that gets us in trouble. Everyone just accepts that everything has to be shitty, and nobody demands results from the government.

  17. #166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    I don't need to find an example of a better country to prove this country isn't run right.
    You DO need an example of a communist country if you're going to say "we might as well be communist because at least they give me this".

    If this country was run correctly, our standard of living should be significantly higher than 1912.
    And I say it is, I don't agree with your method of measuring it.

    Based our discussion, it seems that 1912 is actually quite comparable to 2012. This shouldn't be the case.
    If you compare the fact that humans still need food and water to survive, we've still not found a way to travel at the speed of light, then yes.
    If you insist on ignoring that you are allowed to take out student loans to work in the entertainment industry, talk on a phone while driving, and watch more films and listen to more music sitting outdoors than you could ever in a year back in 1912, then yes, it's comparable.

    If this were a true market, the standard of living should be far and away better than 1912. Industries such as cars, planes, education, health care, etc are all shit.
    Ok, this is where you get into utopialand....what do you mean SHOULD? How are you so sure it will be what you expect?

    Imagine how much better things would be if the government got out of the way. Thats the point I'm getting at. I'm surprised someone who is apparently a Ron Paul supporter would be defending the status quo the way you are.
    Just because I don't sympathize with your complaints doesn't mean I defend the status quo.

    Honestly you sound like an Obama supporter (no offense), everything is shitty but there's nothing you can do about it. It this failed philosophy that gets us in trouble. Everyone just accepts that everything has to be shitty, and nobody demands results from the government.
    No, far from it. Obama supporters WANT change, and WANT it handed to them. I advocate BE the change or move away, or shut up.

  18. #167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    You DO need an example of a communist country if you're going to say "we might as well be communist because at least they give me this".



    And I say it is, I don't agree with your method of measuring it.



    If you compare the fact that humans still need food and water to survive, we've still not found a way to travel at the speed of light, then yes.
    If you insist on ignoring that you are allowed to take out student loans to work in the entertainment industry, talk on a phone while driving, and watch more films and listen to more music sitting outdoors than you could ever in a year back in 1912, then yes, it's comparable.



    Ok, this is where you get into utopialand....what do you mean SHOULD? How are you so sure it will be what you expect?



    Just because I don't sympathize with your complaints doesn't mean I defend the status quo.



    No, far from it. Obama supporters WANT change, and WANT it handed to them. I advocate BE the change or move away, or shut up.
    How can you be a Ron Paul supporter and be completely ignorant of free market principles? When the free market is allowed to operate costs go down and quality of product or service goes up. This is basic economics. Well I can't quite say that. Obama has invented new economic principles that ignore common sense. Maybe thats what you are following. In the U.S., the car industry, plane industry, education industry, health care industry, etc all have rising costs and poor service. You have to be blind not to notice that. This is the case simply because the government regulates all of these industries. If you don't recognize these industries need fixing then you might as well be a supporter of the status quo and vote for Obama or Romney.
    Last edited by tttppp; 02-19-2012 at 09:29 PM.

  19. #168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    How can you be a Ron Paul supporter and be completely ignorant of free market principles? When the free market is allowed to operate costs go down and quality of product or service goes up. This is basic economics. Well I can't quite say that. Obama has invented new economic principles that ignore common sense. Maybe thats what you are following. In the U.S., the car industry, plane industry, education industry, health care industry, etc all have rising costs and poor service. You have to be blind not to notice that. This is the case simply because the government regulates all of these industries. If you don't recognize these industries need fixing then you might as well be a supporter of the status quo and vote for Obama or Romney.
    As if quality of service and costs have no limits to how much it can change...I never said the industries don't need fixing.

  20. #169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    As if quality of service and costs have no limits to how much it can change...I never said the industries don't need fixing.
    Then if you agree with me, why are you arguing with me?

    Do these industries need fixing, or are they already at maximum efficiency? Make up your mind.
    Last edited by tttppp; 02-20-2012 at 12:24 AM.

  21. #170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    Then if you agree with me, why are you arguing with me?

    Do these industries need fixing, or are they already at maximum efficiency? Make up your mind.
    They need fixing and are not necessarily at their maximum efficiency, but it doesn't mean they "Should be" by now. The fact they may need fixing in terms of financial and regulatory efficiency, is independent of whether cars can travel at the speed of light or whether medicine can cure AIDS.

    As for why I argue with you, look back at your own posts. You claim one thing, then when I correct you, you change what you say.
    You ask me how we're better than 1912, then you say you didn't say we're not better. You say we might as well be communist, then you admit you don't know what communist country fits your dream. You call our current state slavery, but you can't tell me what country is better. You say I must agree with you if I'm a Ron Paul supporter, otherwise I must be, or might as well be an Obama supporter...that's why I argue with you, I don't take nicely people cheapshooting.

  22. #171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    They need fixing and are not necessarily at their maximum efficiency, but it doesn't mean they "Should be" by now. The fact they may need fixing in terms of financial and regulatory efficiency, is independent of whether cars can travel at the speed of light or whether medicine can cure AIDS.

    As for why I argue with you, look back at your own posts. You claim one thing, then when I correct you, you change what you say.
    You ask me how we're better than 1912, then you say you didn't say we're not better. You say we might as well be communist, then you admit you don't know what communist country fits your dream. You call our current state slavery, but you can't tell me what country is better. You say I must agree with you if I'm a Ron Paul supporter, otherwise I must be, or might as well be an Obama supporter...that's why I argue with you, I don't take nicely people cheapshooting.
    I never said cars should travel at the speed of light or find the cure for aids, you did. But there should be progress in both industries. The car industries should be able to make cars more fuel efficient and at lower cost over time. The health industry should be able to develop some cures. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

    I was only talking about the theory of communism, not comparing it to any specific country. If you are only going to give people the opportunities to have the basics, then you might as well be a communist country. If you really want an example of a communist country, the U.S. is the closest thing that is modeled after communist economic principles. Its about 90% communist and 10% capitalist. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

    There are no ideal communist countries anymore. The vast majority of communist countries have adopted capitalist principles, so there are very few communist countries. In fact countries like China are actually more capitalist than we are and are better run than the U.S. But they are far from an ideal government.

    Just because there are no examples of counties with an ideal system, that does not mean the U.S. is run correctly. Almost all countries are poorly run, thats why most of them are on the verge of bankruptcy. Being that you are a Ron Paul supporter, you should be aware that the country is not run correctly, and when I state exactly that, you should not be coming up with some bs excuse to argue with me. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

    I've already explained how slavery exists for most americans. Regardless of how other countries operate, that has nothing to do with the fact that most americans are slaves. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.
    Last edited by tttppp; 02-20-2012 at 02:04 PM.

  23. #172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    I never said cars should travel at the speed of light or find the cure for aids. But there should be progress in both industries. The car industries should be able to make cars more fuel efficient and at lower cost over time. The health industry should be able to develop some cures. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

    I was only talking about the theory of communism, not comparing it to any specific country. If you are only going to give people the opportunities to have the basics, then you might as well be a communist country. If you really want an example of a communist country, the U.S. is the closest thing that is modeled after communist economic principles. Its about 90% communist and 10% capitalist. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

    There are no ideal communist countries anymore. The vast majority of communist countries have adopted capitalist principles, so there are very few communist countries. In fact countries like China are actually more capitalist than we are and are better run than the U.S. But they are far from an ideal government.

    Just because there are no examples of counties with an ideal system, that does not mean the U.S. is run correctly. Almost all countries are poorly run, thats why most of them are on the verge of bankruptcy. Being that you are a Ron Paul supporter, you should be aware that the country is not run correctly, and when I state exactly that, you should not be coming up with some bs excuse to argue with me. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

    I've already explained how slavery exists for most americans. Regardless of how other countries operate, that has nothing to do with the fact that most americans are slaves. You already knew this was the point, you are just playing dumb trying to argue for the sake of arguing.
    I wasn't playing dumb, I was making sure you made your point clear and not sweeping through generalizations.

    Again, I was making sure you didn't get away by saying "Communist countries are better", thanks for admitting it's only in theory and the reality of US capitalism, as broken as it is, is better than ANY communist country in existence. If US 90% communist? Then you ought to tell me what country is 50% or less communist, what country is 100% communist, and which of them are more preferable to live.

    Your definition of slavery is absurd, because you couldn't even deny the alleged "slaves" had plenty of choices.

    Just because there are no ideal systems in reality, means you should accept reality and not act like you are entitled to the ideal system you know doesn't exist anywhere. We agree the country needs improvements, but I wonder if we agree on how much, and why. Getting you do take back what you say or be precise on what you mean is not playing dumb, it's playing honesty.

  24. #173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    I wasn't playing dumb, I was making sure you made your point clear and not sweeping through generalizations.

    Again, I was making sure you didn't get away by saying "Communist countries are better", thanks for admitting it's only in theory and the reality of US capitalism, as broken as it is, is better than ANY communist country in existence. If US 90% communist? Then you ought to tell me what country is 50% or less communist, what country is 100% communist, and which of them are more preferable to live.

    Your definition of slavery is absurd, because you couldn't even deny the alleged "slaves" had plenty of choices.

    Just because there are no ideal systems in reality, means you should accept reality and not act like you are entitled to the ideal system you know doesn't exist anywhere. We agree the country needs improvements, but I wonder if we agree on how much, and why. Getting you do take back what you say or be precise on what you mean is not playing dumb, it's playing honesty.
    Just because there are no ideal systems does not mean I should accept this one. I've already given you an example of China and how they are doing better than the U.S. because they have adopted more capitalist concepts than the U.S. If the U.S. just adopted its own capitalist economic concepts it teaches in school, then every industry would become more productive, costs would go down and results would go up. This is not some voodoo I'm preaching. This is economics 101. We're in this mess today because we elect leaders who have no understanding of basic economics. The concepts Obama has been preaching are pure communist principles, not capitalist.

    We've already discussed the concept of slavery. Picking your own color of car does not give you real freedom. This is basically the same as asking a slave which horse he would prefer to help him plow the field. Its not a real freedom.

    I don't know which countries are more or less communist and which are better to live in. Our educational system does a poor job of teaching our own history and does an even worse job teaching foreign history. Obviously Europe is more communist that we are, but I don't know much more than what I see on tv. I saw one country on tv that was pure communist, but I don't remember its name. I do remember its standard of living wasn't significantly lower than ours.

  25. #174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    I don't know which countries are more or less communist and which are better to live in.
    That's all you needed to say. So please don't say "We might as well be ___________" until you actually know what you are talking about.

  26. #175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onlyrp View Post
    That's all you needed to say. So please don't say "We might as well be ___________" until you actually know what you are talking about.
    As I stated before, I was talking about the theory of communism. I wasn't talking about any particular country. I never said lets move to ______ because they are communist.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •