um, food, which we literaly need to survive, housing, water, etc, these things cost money... which we can only get from: a) participating in wage labour, b) stealing or c) selling own fucking kidney on black market.
so yea. capitalism is fucking awful.
Capitalism is awesome, but it needs a healthy dose of semisocialist regulation in order to keep power imbalance in specific industries (mostly the ones where participation is not universally voluntary) from bottlenecking cashflow. Kind of like I could afford a Nintendo Switch (or at least, I would if I weren't saving up for a house down payment), but not to go to the hospital to make sure my kidney stones weren't about to kill me.
So people are mad at the system because it requires them to earn a living if they're able-bodied? Seems so unreasonable. It makes the idea of socialism seem.....i don't know..... lazy?
Neither of the systems is perfect on its own. Capitalism is great for progress in commercial fields, but a capitalism healthcare system is a fucking disaster. The original thought for capitalism was to make the system as meritocratic as possible, but as we can see on the US that ia long gone. A dumb rich kid who never worked a day in his life and inherited all the money from his parents has a bigger chance at success than a poor genius, simly because university education is so expensive. Similarly, a person can go bankrupt at any point in their life because they get sick and his insurance company screws them over. Because of capitalism, the aim of insurance companies isn't to take care of people but to make money, which they do by screwing people over. A woman was refused insurance money because she had acne which they said was a preexisting condition. The environment is vital for our survival, but it gets destroyed because it doesn't generate profit.
In the US right now there are hundreds of thousands of career openings in the "blue collar". Many of these have enormous opportunity for wage earning. Higher education costs are ridiculously out of control like you said but that's not the only rout available. Because of capitalism you have an enormous array of options, you just need to step off your high horse and look around.
.
If you take political corruption out of the picture and let the insurance market truely compete on service, coverage, and cost you would have people leaving the acne denying insurance company in drones. But the government got involved (long before obama) and starded passing legislation that gave some insurance companies an advantage and the rest of the country suffers.
.
Capitalism isnt the problem. Corrupt inside political agreememts are the problem. So lets gut those perminent insiders out of government and send their one sided deals with them. Then we can let true capitalism work instead of the Crony
I was in a hurry and didn't fully finish my thoughts on the matter (also made a few typos but who cares, I don't like editing my comments out of the blue because then people may think I changed my argument to appear smarter), so thank you for expanding on them. Yes, crony capitalism and what could be called legalized bribery in the US is a big problem. Corruption is what makes this stuff possible. However I still think that there are some things that should be left to a more socialist model. The problem with free market healthcare, even if the insurance companies weren't so crappy, is the unpredictability of health. Everyone will naturally buy the cheapest alternative possible, however they might get sick or injured beyond ther insurance plan. Is it caused by their irresponsibility? Yes, but it's just how humans are, especially if they barely have enough money to put food on the table.
Secondly, education. You say "get off your high horse, there are lots of options" and yes there are but in fact many employers judge you by how prestigious your alma mater is. In the US, the most prestigious schools are obviously the most expensive ones. In my country, the most prestigious schools are the ones with the toughest entry exams. In fact, private schools are looked down upon here, because only spoiled rich kids who weren't smart enough to pass these entry exams would go there.
And thirdly, the environment. I think this one is the best example, because while healthcare and education can somewhat generate money, the environment simply doesn't, yet the oxygen we breathe and the water we drink are the most important aspects of our lives. We _literally_ couldn't live without the environment. But it's getting destroyed to make space for… whatever makes money, really. This is where I think it's important to have some government control.
Many people are concerned about jobs. Well, taking care of the environment creates jobs! It's really not that hard to get, and as much as I understand that people dislike having to pay more taxes, in this case it's really worth it.
I agree that there are a lot of companies that weigh far to heavily on the pretentiousness of schooling. But if you're correct, and the best/brightest people arent going to end up working for the companies that hire like that. It also means there should be a huge opportunity for an employer to grab all of these true best/brightest people and for a lower wage as well. Wouldn't that give the "smart" employer an outrageous advantage over the prestigious employer? If that "smart" employer doesn't exsist, it would certainly be an enormous opportunity to become that "smart" employer yourselfe!
As far as people not being responsable enough to carry propper coverage goes. We should be looking for ways to make people more responsable, not enabling irresponsibility. Just like everything from sports to flipping burgers, people contribute more when there are better rewards or worse consequences. If the goal is for people to contribute less, then by all means take the rewars from the ..
..high performers and hand it out to the poor performers. That will successfully lower reward and lessen consequences for the entire population which will inevitably disengage the majority of the population from contributing to the greater society. When that happens it woll result in lowering the quality of life for everyone except the ruling class thats currently preaching that socialism as a good idea. You're being played! And the racket that's being sold to socialism supporters has been executed multiple times throughout history and it's failed every single time.
.
At face value it seems humane to take from the rich and give to the poor. But because human nature is to be lazy if reward and consequences are low then is it truely being humane if you play it out?
The opportunistic future provided by capitalism in the USA is responsable for the greatest advancement of mankind in history. I'll be the first to point out that it wasnt perfect. But in it's reletively short history it's created more opportunity than any other country. And now people have lost so much prospective that they want to bring us full circle.
.
Count me out! If you want that garbage, there's plenty of places on this planet that have what you think you want so go sample that. But dont drag me and my family's future down with you because you fail to understand human nature!
Sorry buddy but that was just the defense. Hundreds of classified documents that had NO "criminal activities" were released, US citizens were put at risk by a traitor who now has lifetime VA benefits.
Which leaks exactly "put US citizens at risk"? Which part? No offense but it sounds to me like you're just using a bunch of buzzwords, because most of the documents were about the wars and US military and diplomatic dispatches. How exactly would exposing war crimes endanger US citizens?
She compromised countless military actions, investigations, informants, and ruined diplomatic relations in the region.
War is an ugly thing, and Manning only made it worse.
If Bradley was more discriminate with the information released, I wouldn't hate Chelsea as much as I do.
"Compromised countless military actions" in wars the US shouldn't even have been in. Yes, I agree, war is an ugly thing, then why do it in the first place? The US trying to play world police is what created this situation, but it turns out the soldiers were massacring civilians instead of actually doing any policing. And don't even try to give me any "but the countries we're at war with don't care about human rights" spiel, firstly it doesn't excuse bombing brown children and laughing at it, secondly the US still has deals with Saudi Arabia, one of the most (if not THE most) fundamentalist Islamic countries on Earth that doesn't care about human rights, treats women as second class citizens, publicly beheads homosexuals and so on. There's so much hypocrisy in the administration it hurts.
I stopped reading when I read "in wars the US shouldn't even have been in". If you cannot understand or acknowledge why we acted, then I have no desire to entertain what other points you would attempt to make.
I like how you make no other arguments besides "Well… you don't understand!" without actually making a point yourself. It shows that you've run out of arguments and are only attempting a smartass ad hominem. Consider this conversation over.
9/11? Saddam Hussain? Kuwait? We had damn good reasons to be in the Middle East, and you refusing to acknowledge as much is proof enough that you aren't informed enough to argue.
Yes, let's just ignore the immense vacuum of power these political assassinations have created and out of which Al-Qaeds or ISIS rose. We got the bad guy (and the oil) and that's all that matters, right? Oh whoops it destabilized the entire region and now terrorists are running rampant. *innocent whistling*
New evidence came up some time ago, allegedly it was mostly the Saudis who had their fingers in 9/11. Guess who the US is still making deals with? Saudi Arabia is not included in the Muslim ban either.
We also created the vacuum of power that put Hussein in power. We built up the Taliban and Isis. We turned away Jewish refugees during WW2 and the British broke turkey from the ottomans and helped create Palestine and Israel. There's a lot of history that can't be undone. If we facilitate the conditions for terrorism and suffering of other countries we are hypocrites. If we try to undo messes we made we are hypocrites. History, not just the parts relating to America, global history is full of people conquering and genociding each other. The east, west, and in between. It's a complex web where governments are looking after their own people first, politicians and profiteers are looking after themselves, and all mixed up are people trying to live life and do right in the world. We aren't saints but we aren't the devil either. It's a global community and what happens in one place effects many. Sometimes there is no "right answer" and just the lesser of evils, or the most benefit for you.
To everyone arguing for capitalism in the comments, please tell me how your imperialistic view on politics can survive without the slave labour from african countries :) or sweatshops from china? Hahaha fuck you.
We'd still get by just as well, there just would not be so much cheap labor for jerks to exploit.
It's not out fault second and third world countries can't take care of themselves.
Let's ignore the fact that non capitalist nations perpetrated some of the worst human rights violations, forced/slave labor systems, genocide. Anyway- So firstly, these sweatshops, do they only exist to supply capitalists or do they supply goods to domestic china too? Second... Chinese sweatshops. In China. A communist country where the government must allow or approve all legal business. In fact the government owns or runs many. So the communists allow/force citizens to work in low paying terrible jobs, and the capitalists treat their workers better and don't run "sweatshops" legally with their own citizens? How is that an argument against capitalism? Wouldn't that mean China was responsible for these sweatshops? "Freedom" isn't big in a country where you can't even use google right. Imperialism... like... china and Tibet? China and Taiwan? Are capitalist countries perfect? No. But please think before you spew simple minded ignorance.
so yea. capitalism is fucking awful.
.
If you take political corruption out of the picture and let the insurance market truely compete on service, coverage, and cost you would have people leaving the acne denying insurance company in drones. But the government got involved (long before obama) and starded passing legislation that gave some insurance companies an advantage and the rest of the country suffers.
.
Capitalism isnt the problem. Corrupt inside political agreememts are the problem. So lets gut those perminent insiders out of government and send their one sided deals with them. Then we can let true capitalism work instead of the Crony
And thirdly, the environment. I think this one is the best example, because while healthcare and education can somewhat generate money, the environment simply doesn't, yet the oxygen we breathe and the water we drink are the most important aspects of our lives. We _literally_ couldn't live without the environment. But it's getting destroyed to make space for… whatever makes money, really. This is where I think it's important to have some government control.
As far as people not being responsable enough to carry propper coverage goes. We should be looking for ways to make people more responsable, not enabling irresponsibility. Just like everything from sports to flipping burgers, people contribute more when there are better rewards or worse consequences. If the goal is for people to contribute less, then by all means take the rewars from the ..
.
At face value it seems humane to take from the rich and give to the poor. But because human nature is to be lazy if reward and consequences are low then is it truely being humane if you play it out?
.
Count me out! If you want that garbage, there's plenty of places on this planet that have what you think you want so go sample that. But dont drag me and my family's future down with you because you fail to understand human nature!
War is an ugly thing, and Manning only made it worse.
If Bradley was more discriminate with the information released, I wouldn't hate Chelsea as much as I do.
New evidence came up some time ago, allegedly it was mostly the Saudis who had their fingers in 9/11. Guess who the US is still making deals with? Saudi Arabia is not included in the Muslim ban either.
It's not out fault second and third world countries can't take care of themselves.