rEvolutionist wrote:Seth wrote:rEvolutionist wrote:Seth wrote:
Some of them are. Others of them are being economically bound to dependence in an evil plot to control their votes.
Ok, Glen Beck.
I note, as usual, that when you cannot formulate a reasoned answer in rebuttal you have resorted to personal invective. You're as predictable as the sunrise.
What do you fucking expect?!? You peddle idiotic conspiracy theories, and you think you deserve respect? Fucking LOL. Start showing an ability to critically think and then you will get taken seriously.
And yet you cannot debunk a single one of my "conspiracy theories" with facts and evidence and instead resort to a typical Marxist Alinsky tactic of attempting to demonize your opponent by using ad hom rhetoric.
There simply aren't jobs for these people.
There are jobs that they don't want to do available for them. Why is it that Mexicans and other South Americans are flooding over the border right now if there are no jobs available for them? There are. But they are jobs that many in the dependent class refuse to do, and they are facilitated in that arrogance and pride by a system that pays them to be that way.
Rubbish. The reason the illegals get the jobs is that they are massively underpaid.
No, they get the same wage anyone doing that job gets, that's the law.
WTF?!? Of course they don't. They are off the books. THey don't get the same industrial protections that legal workers get. Show me this law and the statistics that say that illegals are working legally (if they are working legally, then how the fuck are they illegal?? Shouldn't they be kicked out of the country??).
What century are you living in? Migrant and agricultural labor is regulated here and inspectors routinely inspect large farming operations to make sure that employees are being paid and that the employer meets all the required safety standards for that industry. Yes, there are exceptions, but it's not ubiquitous because the government tends to shut down and seize violator's property. As for legality, there are plenty of illegals here who are working on the books and are being paid and who pay taxes because they use false identification and someone else's SSN to get a job. Employers are supposed to check the identity of all employees and certify they have done so, but there is approximately zero enforcement of those federal labor laws. While this ignoring of illegals has been going on for a very long time, it's now accelerated markedly under Obama, whose plan it is to Cloward and Pivin the system to bring it down and force Congress to give amnesty to all illegals in the country, which is why tens of thousands of illegal alien children are flooding over the border, thanks to concerted and well-organized efforts of the Cloward and Piven crowd in South America to tell people down there that the US has completely stopped deporting unaccompanied children, and if they can get their kids here, they will not be sent back and will eventually get amnesty.
There's no telling how many of those children are being forced into prostitution, raped, murdered and otherwise abused on their way here, but it's got to be massive.
The only way American unemployed could get those jobs would be to work illegally.
Er, no, they could get off their asses, quit taking money from the government and move to where the work is. But it's easier to take the government dole, so they do.
Conservative moral hazard. Absolutely nothing to back up your hate other than idiotic conservative morals. Where's your evidence that these people lazy?
They are physically capable of working and choose not to do so.
And even amongst that percentage, there would be rotation of workers in and out.
There is.
So those aren't part of the mythical "dependent class" you dolt!
They are when they are depending on government largess to make ends meet, fuckwit.
WTF?!? You claimed earlier that the 10% unemployed at any given moment in an economy WEREN'T the "dependent class". Stop back flipping. It only shows how terrible you are at constructing an argument.
No I didn't.
"Corporate welfare" exists because what corporations get from the government is dwarfed by the wealth that they produce in return. I'm not in favor of corporate welfare either, but it's not just a giveaway, it's a way of supporting the economic success of vital industries that generate wealth and employ people. You are aware that Obama nationalized GM in order to keep union workers employed, right? Talk about your corporate welfare....
You either believe in the free market or you don't.
I do.
In your case, like most conservatives, your ridiculous morals get in the way of a pure ideological belief.
You mistake my statement of fact for an expression of my ideological preferences.
No, it's simple, Seth. You support welfare for the rich and not the poor. That's an ideological failure.
I don't support welfare for anyone.
"...it's [corporate welfare]
a way of supporting the economic success of vital industries that generate wealth and employ people." Yes, you really hate it, don't you.
Quite simply, you are happy to accept a certain amount of corporate welfare and rail like a rabid squirrel about welfare at the bottom end of society. You are just like all conservatives. Suffering from irrational moral dictates.
It's a fact. I would prefer that industries fend for themselves as I believe the free market will deal with the results adequately, but others think that certain industries or businesses need or deserve a financial boost. The reasons for this sort of advocacy vary widely and can be semi-legitimate or flatly corrupt, which is the problem. I'd rather have no government involvement in business in order to avoid the corruption that inevitably occurs when such things are permitted to anyone and I'd rather put up with whatever vicissitudes to industry the market might bring to bear, even if its causes some economic discomfort on a national basis. The country and the economy will be stronger and more resilient if companies must either adapt or die without being put on life support by the taxpayers. But stating that corporate welfare has its uses and benefits is simply an economic fact. I just don't think the benefits outweigh the negatives of creating a system that is so prone to politicization and corruption.
I support things like government-sponsored industrial and vocational training courses for the unemployed that they are required to attend if they expect to get a check. I support bus tickets for the unemployed at government expense to ship them to places where labor is needed...as opposed to spending millions shipping illegal alien children to Arizona to overwhelm the social services system in a Cloward and Piven attack on the government. I support assistance for those who are physically incapable of working and hunger for those who are physically capable of working.
As usual, with libertarians, the psychological aspect is absent. It's so damn tiring discussing this shit with people who refuse to learn about human psychology.
I'll throw in psychological motivational training as well.
It's why we see conservatives constantly railing against the poor and disable and disadvantaged,
Show me. I don't see conservatives "constantly railing against the poor and disabled and disadvantaged," I see them railing against feel-good, do-nothing Progressive Marxist programs that don't help people out of perennial dependence but rather bind them to it perpetually and generationally.
You have got to fucking kidding me??! Get back under your rock, you fucking troll.
I knew you had nothing in your quiver, so your insults are highly predictable and indicative of your lack of mental acumen and intelligence.
You are simply trolling. There is no way in this universe that you are serious. YOU FUCKING RAILED AGAINST POOR AND DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE IN THIS FUCKING THREAD, NEY IN THIS FUCKING POST. Goddamn, I don't know why I continue to even give you even the most minor respect by replying to your idiotic arguments.
Take a pill before you stroke out.
Conservatives are not "against" the poor, they are just against the evil and manifestly political plans of the left to bind poor people to the left politically because the left has made them dependent on government largess for their very existence. Liberal programs are cynical and evil plots to garner votes of poor people by threatening to cut off their government checks if they don't vote for liberals.
You can't seriously believe this shit, can you?? Do you wear a tinfoil hat too???
I believe the self-evident and obvious truths of the liberal dependence agenda that I see in action every day and more and more so with each passing hour.
Yeah, and I believe there is an illumanti of rich conservatives micromanaging the world. See how your idiotic conspiracy is the same as the opposite idiotic conspiracy?
Do you see me contradicting you? Can you say "George Soros?"
Conservatives want to bring people OUT of poverty for their betterment and the betterment of society. Unfortunately it's much easier to convince poor people to vote for you by promising them more government largess and less work than it is to convince them if they work hard and the economy prospers they too will prosper.
Conservatives want to eliminate poverty.
What an absolute load of unmitigated shit!
You certainly are.
Why are you chopping my posts into little pieces. Are you trolling?
Because each of your silly statements deserves its own rebuttal.
Capitalism REQUIRES an exploited underclass.
Nah. It requires people who don't want to take the risks associated with capital risk who prefer a steady paycheck instead.
Absolute bullshit, as YOUR OWN REPLY below shows.
I'm sure that's what you think.
Without it the motivation to slave away at shit jobs, and being treated like shit, evaporates.
Hunger is a great motivator.
As i said, 'exploited underclass'.
There's no exploitation going on. People gotta eat. If they want to eat, they need to work. Pretty simple really.
What makes you think you have a right to a non-shit job? You don't.
As i said, 'exploited underclass'.
If you feel you're being exploited because you don't have what it takes to move up the corporate ladder and out of your shit job, you're exploiting yourself.
It's not exploitation when an employer only pays an employee what he or she is actually worth.
It's well known that conservatives suffer under the fervent belief of "moral hazard". These morals are based on regressive religious thinking and not on modern psychological evidence of how humans act. Conservatives don't give a shit about someone in poverty. All they can see is a moral hazard which emanates from the ancient reptile part of their simple brains. Moral hazard, must destroy! Hulk smash!
Well, it seems they are right about the "moral hazard" of allowing a liberal government that panders to the dependent class rather than a government that expects individual responsibility and hard work.
But it's not based in an understanding of human psychology. It hinges on the false belief that we are independent free willed agents who can at any moment choose to ignore everything that has gone on up till that point. It also fails to take account of institutional disadvantage, and bigotry the likes displayed by you and Dave Dodo and Coito and other conservatives.
Meh. Apologisim for sloth and idleness. Improvise, adapt and overcome...or starve.
and saying almost fuck all about the MASSIVE sums of money that are being siphoned off by the rich.
You seem to be laboring under the misconception that rich people stuff their mattresses with cash. Sorry, but that's a zero-sum fallacy you've got going there.
You really are fucking clueless.
So you'd like to think...if you were actually capable of thinking rather than the knee-jerk liberal twaddle you spout at the slightest provocation.
That money is removed from your national economy. It's got nothing to do with liberal conspiracies. It's simple economics. The rich are syphoning off huge amounts of money from our national economies, and then we get them and puppets like you complain that we can't afford to provide a welfare safety net for the most disadvantaged in our societies.
You don't understand global economics...among other things.
The amount of money stuffed in tax-free havens across the world rivals the size of the American economy.
And you think that money just sits there doing nothing? You need some remedial education in the banking system. Just because it's tax free in the US doesn't mean it's not hard at work generating wealth.
Um, not in the US it isn't. You can do better than this, Seth.
Can you say "multinational corporation?"
That is, many trillions of dollars removed from the tax system.
Good. The more wealth we can shelter from cupidinous politicians the better off we are as a species.
And there it is! Relief for the rich (aka rich welfare). Why do you even pretend you think otherwise. Why do we constantly have to do through these debates with you erecting a false façade to pretend that you are driven by a libertarian ideology? You are driven by seflish and hateful conservative morals. The rich are good because they are rich, and the poor are bad because they are poor.
Rich and poor are neither good nor bad, they are merely what they are and each has the individual capacity to change their respective economic and social conditions if they choose to do so. As for keeping money out of the hands of politicians, you seem to think this equates to "relief for the rich." It doesn't, it just means that politicians can't skim off the cream before sending a pittance back to the poor as part of a vote-buying scheme.
When I give to charity I give directly to a person in need, in cash, no government functionary needed, no skimming off the top by "management," and no taxation of the gift by government.
And even from the taxed money, large amounts of it leaves offshore to the third world.
And you think the third world doesn't need that capital? What kind of elitist selfish swine are you? Those people are far more poor than anyone in the US or the UK.
Trolling again. I answer this in the following sentence. Stop trolling.
Stop being trolled.
And before you bleat on about free trade, the majority of that money winds up in the hands of the nouveau rich in those countries and lining the pockets of corrupt officials and politicians in those countries.
Sounds like a personal problem to me. Money, you see, like rust, never sleeps and doesn't line anyone's pockets for very long before it's spent on something, something that required labor to create, which requires capital investment and workers, which employs people and generates wealth. It's an endless cycle.
Yes, we know how trickle down works. That's why we've seen massive increases in inequality since neoliberalism and trickle down nonsense took hold in the 80's. Conservative to the core, Seth.
And yet at the same time the condition of the poor has dramatically improved because of trickle-down. "Inequality" is just a Marxist boogey-man term tossed about as a part of a Marxist/Alinsky propaganda campaign that tries to convince people that it's not "fair" that some people have more than other people, so what the rich have should be taken from them and distributed to the proletariat.
The problem is, Marxism doesn't work. One of the reasons that Marxism doesn't work is because when someone actually succeeds in improving their economic and social condition by hard work and innovation they immediately come to understand why people who do the same thing object to the lazy bums of the dependent class using the Mace of State to take from them what they worked so hard to achieve.
On the other hand, these sorts of entrepreneurs are highly likely to use what they have learned, combined with their charitable and altruistic impulses, to educate and assist other less-fortunate people to learn how to work hard and be successful, thus raising them out of poverty too.
Do you really fucking think that the rich would choose not to take a still gigantic profit if they couldn't get away with avoiding tax, or if they couldn't get a giant government hand out? In the latter case, they will just move to a more profitable investment. Remember, the rich aren't investing anything tangible. It's just money. Money can be moved and reposition with far more ease than real people can pick up their lives and move or retrain or travel for large hours of the day.
No, it's not money, it's capital. When one day you come to understand the difference between money and capital, you will perhaps understand why your arguments are based in utter ignorance and mindless bigotry.
It's the same thing, in my example.
No it's not, and therein lies the fundamental problem with your idiotic rebuttal.
It is, as I explain in the next sentence. Stop trolling. It isn't a substitute for an argument.
You have yet to make an argument, so how would you know?
Capital can move much more easily than real flesh and bones can. Stop avoiding the point, troll.
Of course it can.
So why are you arguing the point then?? Is it because you are a troll?
Because you are falsely assuming that is a bad thing. It's not.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
