• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

When you mention those most contributing to the poverty of the poor...

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Is this the "there'd be no wealth if it weren't for the rich" argument?
The wealthy have their use. But I wasn't referring
to them...did you know that capitalism even includes
small businesses, independent contractors, & even
employees? It's true!
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I think UBI is a progressive idea - and so does @Revoltingest. (One of the very few things we can agree on in terms of economics.)
Thank you, but I'm indefensible, even though
I also favor free health care, free speech, free
education, free porn, & ending the police state.
(Wrong tribe, ya know.)
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
They didn't save it....nay, they've ganged up to cause
USA to fall in economic liberty relative to other countries.
Even Canuckistan is now more capitalistic than this
lumbering policeman to the world.

It depends on what time frame you're referring to. I would say that liberals held the upper hand from FDR to LBJ. Nixon was also a Keynesian, so he clearly had some liberal influences. That's when they saved capitalism.

But once Reaganomics came into the picture, the liberals were all but defeated and powerless, especially on economic issues. Their only hope to remain political relevant was in embracing identity politics, a strategy which worked for a while but now showing diminishing returns.

So, basically, what we have now are conservative capitalists and limousine liberals on the same side, with the extremists on the nationalist right growing in power. The socialist left is weak and politically impotent, as exemplified by the dismal failures of Occupy Wall Street and the widespread opposition to Sanders from the Democratic (liberal) rank and file.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Thank you, but I'm indefensible, even though
I also favor free health care, free speech, free
education, free porn, & ending the police state.
(Wrong tribe, ya know.)
I see you as my evil twin, or mirror image. Together for liberty, opposed on economics.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It depends on what time frame you're referring to.
You set the stage with FDR.
Call it the 20th century.
I would say that liberals held the upper hand from FDR to LBJ. Nixon was also a Keynesian, so he clearly had some liberal influences. That's when they saved capitalism.
I called Nixon a commie back in the day.
Imagine taking control of government, & demanding that
no pay or price increases are legal without Nixon's stamp.
Nixon was the perfect liberal...economic authoritarianism,
feting communist China, waging that useless war in Vietnam,
But once Reaganomics came into the picture, the liberals were all but defeated and powerless, especially on economic issues. Their only hope to remain political relevant was in embracing identity politics, a strategy which worked for a while but now showing diminishing returns.
Isn't it odd....liberals give Presidents credit when they're
Democrats, & things improve. But when the Jimmy Carter
Malaise ended under Reagan, no credit at all.
So, basically, what we have now are conservative capitalists and limousine liberals on the same side, with the extremists on the nationalist right growing in power. The socialist left is weak and politically impotent, as exemplified by the dismal failures of Occupy Wall Street and the widespread opposition to Sanders from the Democratic (liberal) rank and file.
Liberals....they love regulation, high taxes, war, limiting speech,
the prison system, civil forfeiture, war, racial quotas, & war.
As long as blacks don't move into their neighborhood, they're
happy as clams. Conservatives are no better. And Libertarians
are useless. We're all doomed.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I see you as my evil twin, or mirror image. Together for liberty, opposed on economics.
You believe you're Hugo to my Bart, eh.

Economic authoritarians better watch out.
Check for me under yer bed before going to sleep.
raw
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I am happy if Capitalists gain their billions honestly.

By honestly I mean through hard work...and by producing something good for the society.
So as for Tesla owner...I think he deserves that.

But Soros destroyed the economy of many countries through unfair, unjust, shady speculations.

He has no fear of God. He has no remorse.
No empathy. No heart.
 
Last edited:

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I'm a progressive.
Unlike you, I don't dismiss the poor as helpless
& incapable of improvement. They can do better.

Sometimes the State has to fix the economic system to help them.
By controlling the economy of a country with rigid regulations.
Keynes used to say that. A great person.
 
Last edited:

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Caution...sarcasm ahead:

The right won't spend money to educate the poor in life skills.
The left wants only to teach the poor about 6th wave intersectional
post modern radical feminist gas lighting theory.

If University is not free...I don't see how the poor can improve their conditions.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Sonetimes the State has the fix to system to help them.
By controlling the economy of a country with rigid regulations.
Keynes used to say that. A great person.
Or instead of micro-controlling the economy,
give the poor some useful help.
Socialism never rid any country of poverty, eg,
USSR, Cuba, N Korea, Khmer Rouge, China.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Ideally, the government represents the will and interests of the people. It manages common goods, like e.g. clean water and air. When some people or corporations are allowed to use up common goods without paying for it, the goods are badly managed.

Just about the same time as the US, in the Reagan era. By the neo-liberal ideology, there should be no state-owned corporations, so profitable businesses were privatized. At the same time, corporations implemented economic principles (which were theorized earlier) like minmax. It was also a time of rapid automatization. All that taken together has landed us where we are now.

I explain you why.
Many Capitalists hate the European Constitutions because they contain dangerous socialist principles .
That, if implemented fully, can destroy their dream to phagocytize all the resources, assets, properties Europe has.
Do you know the game monopoly?
That. With real euros.
 
Last edited:

Heyo

Veteran Member
I explain you why.
Many Capitalists hate the European Constitutions because they contain dangerous socialist principles .
That, if implemented fully, can destroy their dream to phagocytate all the resources, assets, properties Europe has.
Do you know the game monopoly?
That. With real euros.
And we let them, that is the most depressing.
 
Top