We have already had this convo about capitalism preying on the poor. It doesn’t, it gives them a chance to make something from their life if they work hard. All you are doing is playing the victim card for the poor.
English
-
"Inherited wealth and wealth inequality. A capitalist society is based on the legal right to private property and the ability to pass on wealth to future generations. Capitalists argue that a capitalist society is fair because you gain the rewards of your hard work. But, often people are rich, simply because they inherit wealth or are born into a privileged class. Therefore, capitalist society not only fails to create equality of outcome but also fails to provide equality of opportunity."
-
*Mega-Facepalm* we have had this exact same conversation and it ended with you deflecting the argument.
-
Translation: "I have no argument so I'm just going to try and get away!"
-
Yeah keep telling yourself that. Capitalism gives the poor an opportunity to make a better life for themselves through hard work and determination. Case-in-point Andrew Carnegie, he came to America a dirt poor Irish immigrant working mills for $.25 a day. He became the second richest man in the U.S. by brilliant investment, and revolutionizing production of steel products. That is the beauty of capitalism it rewards those who work hard and make smart decisions. As for privilege, A father or mother providing for their child is not privilege it is a gift given out of love. Before you bring up the rich having the money for generations like you did before take into account that these ultra rich have usually revolutionized, invented, or improved some facet of society( Carnegie, Rockefeller, Morgan, Gates, Jobs, Disney, Edison, Bell, ect...). They have earned the right for their family to live comfortably forever. Knowing that you provided for your son’s son’s son’s son is an amazing thing, a pinnacle of achievement, an ultimate gift.
-
[quote]We have already had this convo about capitalism preying on the poor. It doesn’t, it gives them a chance to make something from their life if they work hard. All you are doing is playing the victim card for the poor.[/quote] >"Capitalism doesn't prey upon the poor" >looks at stores price-gouging during natural disasters, like charging $40 for a case of water lol
-
>not realizing supply and demand I don't see you there selling water for cheaper.
-
>looks at socialism >looks at Venezuela
-
Editado por Nix: 1/17/2018 12:21:48 AMThe dynamic of capital accumulation still drives economic activity, most enterprises are privately-owned and profit seeking, the the wage-labor relationship is still in place - and even more fundamentally - Veneuzela operates in a global capitalist market system.
-
[quote]>looks at socialism >looks at Venezuela[/quote]...ok? I'm not making an argument for socialism.
-
[quote][quote]>looks at socialism >looks at Venezuela[/quote]...ok? I'm not making an argument for socialism.[/quote] You’re argument is just as bad
-
She also conveniently leaves out the fact that capitalism has brought over 1,000,000,000 people out of poverty.
-
Raising the poverty line doesn't count as "bringing people out of poverty".
-
How is it “raising the poverty line” if capitalism lifts them out of it?
-
It doesn't, I meant it lowers the poverty line.
-
Alright, let me ask you this, if capitalism is SOOO bad, should we just take away any chance of climbing the ladder of success and make sure there’s no ladder at all? You people say that capitalism leaves people impoverished, but what has happened time and time again, whenever communism has been tried and the economy took a nose dive, they had to implement capitalist policies to turn things around.
-
I don't support state communism in the slightest, places like the Soviet Union, Mao's China etc. were horrific dictatorships, but this idea that Capitalism is the only system and that it even is a positive one for the masses is fundamentally flawed.
-
Editado por Liam_the_Censor: 1/17/2018 2:21:48 AMBut how will communism succeed without the state? Who will take from everyone and deem that they have “each according to his need”? That’s right, the government. People don’t want to give up what they earn, and they shouldn’t have to unless they want to. Capitalism gives people a chance to live beyond their necessities. If you only want necessities, you can do that. If you want more, you have to work harder. Nothing is forced on you, you don’t have to have a job, you’ll starve if you don’t but that’s your choice. Communism takes from everyone, capitalism is altruistic by nature. Capitalism says, “in order to get what I want, I have to give something in return.” There’s self interest involved, yes, but it also benefits you because you get something you value more in exchange for something you value less.
-
Thing about Socialism, at least Anarcho-Socialism, is that it seeks to destroy arbitrary positions of power, and abolish wage slavery, that is having to work your whole life to merely survive, a vicious cycle of meaningless and struggling. From an earlier post: "Inherited wealth and wealth inequality. A capitalist society is based on the legal right to private property and the ability to pass on wealth to future generations. Capitalists argue that a capitalist society is fair because you gain the rewards of your hard work. But, often people are rich, simply because they inherit wealth or are born into a privileged class. Therefore, capitalist society not only fails to create equality of outcome but also fails to provide equality of opportunity"
-
What’s wrong with inheriting wealth? And why should money one man made be taken and given to those he didn’t choose to give it to. Also, socialism doesn’t allow for people to live above their necessities of survival, capitalism does. A key example is America. Pretty much everyone has a mobile phone, a house, car etc.