every democracy is deeply flawed, including Nordic countries as we’ve seen, and the fact that your list doesn’t get that, invalidates it.
Right, spreading it around is a consequence, not a cause of economic growth.
And who or what are they spreading the 50%+ tax around on anyway?
Might be on stuff that doesn’t actually benefit the poor.
The ones with bigger brains and higher iQs tend to be more able and willing to play ball.
No it came from DNA, among other internal factors, which you’ve already conceded.
Firstly, everything that happens to someone or something is a result of both external, and internal factors.
Secondly, it is not an injustice for the smart, strong and hardworking to prosper more than the not so smart etcetera, it is justice, so white people don’t owe others anything.
The rich could promise to make the poor governors rich after they exit government.
My club is something I own, our country is something we own, so the two are not equivalent.
I don’t want to push the natives out, I don’t have a problem with them so long as they don’t think I owe them something they don’t owe me.
Trump hasn’t started any new wars I’m aware of, whereas Obama and the Clintons did.
On the economy I party agree with you, but recall Finland, they want the middle class to pay the same % of tax as the rich, and the working class to pay half that.
Since the rich often evade taxes, they’ll end up paying say the same % of tax as the poor or less, so essentially what we have is the middle class paying for the poor’s crumbs and the rich’s corporate welfare, so if libertarians are ultra-conservative, than everyone is.
And on social and foreign policy I totally disagree.
It doesn’t matter how many Germans actually drank the cool aid, the point is the Nazis were serving it, for they weren’t Christians, they were Social Darwinists and neopagans.
If you discovered the woman you were married to for 10 years was plotting to kill you, for you found and read her diary, and in it there was a five year old entry where she wrote she hated you and was plotting to kill you after you became sufficiently wealthy, would you assume the day before she wrote that entry she loved you?
Of course not, you would presume she was using you for most or the entire time, especially if upon further reflection, you realized everything she did was 100% for her, and not at all for you.
Sure, perhaps when they were kids, but not for long after they joined the Nazi Party.
I’m sure they were going to edit that part out.
You don’t know anything about Nazi philosophy then, they saw the bible as the very antithesis of everything they stood for, they blamed democracy, communism and all they considered degenerate and weak in Europe on it, permitting all whom they hated to survive and flourish,for them it was either usher in a new scientific,pagan era,or perish
You can be irreligious and an absolutist or relativist and still discriminate.
And discrimination isn’t bad if it’s your preference and it’s not unreasonable.
So do you, most of those hillbillies you hate are Christian.
I thought Hitchens was left-wing across the board, but politically he was mixed.
Guns can be used to defend people or act as a deterrence too, and religion isn’t just a gun, it’s charity, community, etcetera.
I could regurgitate the answers I know they want without believing all or any of them.
Chomsky’s good, but everyone with half a brain should try to critically analyze as much as they can.
Trust is a necessary evil at best, plain evil at worst.
Liberty isn’t just a means to an end for some people, even irreligious people, it can be an end in and of itself.
You can value liberty and still value other values simultaneously.
You be can be both reservedly willing to sacrifice some liberty for the sake of other values at times, and reservedly willing to sacrifice other values for the sake of liberty at times, it doesn’t have to be a one way street.
I think the fundamental difference between your socialism (or your communism, for as time goes on I can see you wish to expand government far beyond UBI) and my socialism, is for me it’s ultimately a means to an end (extrinsic socialism), something limited and perhaps temporary, the end being greater freedom and independence, the more free and independent we are the less we’ll need it, whereas for you it’s an end in and of itself (intrinsic socialism), something absolute and permanent.
It’s happening on its own. It would take gov intervention to prevent the consolidation. Big farms eat small farms because big farms produce cheaper food. Only an elitist could stop it.
I think it is inherent.
The profit to run lots of little farms is more than the profit required to run one big farm.
The pollution required to run lots of little farms is more than the pollution required to run one big farm.
It’s easier to regulate one big farm than lots of little farms.
Yes and Trump would rather get rid of all robots so we could go back to 1955. Lots of people want to decrease efficiency for sentimental reasons.
No, I disagree. The small ones exploit far more than the big. They have to to stay in business in competition with the big.
Most people do not want to run their own business and are not capable of it.
I’d consider myself more free while depending on government than I would depending on employment. Rights come from government.
Capitalists are getting their clock cleaned by socialists. What planet are you living on?
Dude, the fact that you’re terrified of extinction, outgroups taking over, and that poor people may get something for nothing means you. are. brain. damaged. That’s not an insult. Take it seriously. You should be angry at the system that did this to you. The good news is I got out of it and you can too.
The list doesn’t posit that the #1 rank is a perfect democracy, but just that it’s more democratic than #2. And as Sil pointed out, the US should really rank much lower, perhaps in the 50s.
Economic growth? What the heck does that mean? Oil flowing from the ground is economic growth? Is prostitution economic growth? If we tear down a house and rebuild it, it counts in gdp, but is it economic growth? Tornadoes are economic growth? You get a speeding ticket and that’s economic growth? Economic growth is meaningless.
As President, I will…
Change the way we measure the economy, from GDP and the stock market to a more inclusive set of measurements that ensures humans are thriving, not barely making it by. New measurements like Median Income and Standard of Living, Health-adjusted Life Expectancy, Mental Health, Childhood Success Rates, Social and Economic Mobility, Absence of Substance Abuse, and other measurements will give us a much clearer and more powerful sense of how we are doing both individually and as a society. yang2020.com/policies/human-capitalism/
Leave it to an Asian to think clearly LOL!
True.
Yeah maybe.
And dna came from the environment. Still getting old man.
The internal could only come from the external unless the internal existed before it existed in order to create itself.
I guess so, but at least they are required to be out of government in order to realize the wealth.
If you own it, then it’s not public. If it’s public, then you don’t own it. Can’t have it both ways.
But you’re sitting on their land.
Trump wants to cut social spending and issue new debt to expand military spending, which is more welfare for the rich to go along with his massive tax cut for the rich. Bush started Iraq. Bush started Afghanistan. I don’t know much about Syria. Anyway, Clinton and Obama were conservatives.
That just means the Fins are buying the baloney from the right. Appeals to “fairness” come from the right.
Hence all the bible references and appeals to Jesus.
Probably. If not the day before, then at some point before. Am I supposed to believe she married me because maybe one day I might get rich and then she could kill me? Why not marry someone who was already rich?
Most don’t snap out of it until they are adults. Hitchens may be the only exception, who realized it was baloney at 8.
Then it wouldn’t be Mein Kampf
Sure I do. It’s identical to republican philosophy. They even advocate killing people in our concentration camps. Go on fox news and read comments. Right after church on sunday they cheer lethal injection and complain that it took 30 years and want more killings of undesirables. I can’t see a difference in a bible-thumping republican and a nazi; only the extents.
That’s true of the republican party, but they don’t seek to change it. Republicans are a mockery to the bible, yet the bible is their ally.
They blame it on atheism the same as they do today. Later on Hitler realized the degeneracy of the christian, but also realized there’s no way to convince the people of that.
But if you call yourself an atheist, it’s highly unlikely you’d be an absolutist.
Depends why you’re discriminating.
Ok, you have me there lol. What can I say? We both have incentive to lie, but my position is sensible while yours is reaching.
He evolved through time. He began as a flaming liberal but tempered after seeing religiosity in the left. Like the Green party. And he went to school with Clinton at Oxford and knew the guy was a charlatan. And he was for the Iraq war (no one can figure out why).
Yes but we don’t need religion for charity. The Red Cross is secular.
But how could you disagree without accepting a contrary authority? Unless you were around in nazi germany, you pretty much have to trust someone.
I wish you’d just be honest and admit you want to see poor/lazy people suffer. I’d respect your honesty at least. Your entire political philosophy is predicated on that point.
Ok, I think I’m caught up now. Holla when you’re ready for me to reply again. I can’t tell sometimes and I don’t want to break the flow because messages get lost in the mix that way.
