quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

•Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
•Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Etc.

You could have saved a lot of time and just pointed out that anyone with a 32" TV screen/monitor has it better that J. D. Rockefeller or Julius Caesar.

It's obvious that any notion of relevancy is beyond either you or bozo, as would be any understanding of evolution at all.

News flash; openly advocating that the poor of today should exist as did the poor of 5,000 years ago is not most peoples' idea of evolution.

Nor is it any thinking person's idea of evolution that we still have political parties today that promote policies which advocate inducement to the private sector which sustain a level poverty far beyond what evolution would otherwise have it.

As I have said numerous times before: If you don't like poor people, then quit voting for the assholes who are hell-bent on creating more of them.

(if u don't have an address u cant register to vote.) ....hence why they want to create more poor people.... less voters against them.

so they as far as they are concerned those poor people don't exist....or don't need to.

So I'm not surprised they think poor people have milddle-class amenities.... they don't see the ACTUALLY poorest people in the first place....

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

No, I do not think that the tipping point has been reached, far too many still cling to the idea that they too might be able to somehow worm their way into the exploitative class, however, it is approaching with increasing rapidity. The wealth inequality crisis will be the trigger, it is the inevitable downfall of every exploitative system.
and as for why the system matters, well not all systems are equally amenable to an exploitative class. Capitalism requires it, it is based on the existence of an exploiting minority and an exploited majority. Socialism makes it more difficult for a single interrelated exploitative class to arise, rather it is prone to the danger of multiple exploitative groups, but they will share less of a class consciousness. Communism, makes it even more difficult, and the exploitative elements to which it is prone would be very diverse, and thus less inimical to the health of the whole body politic.

I read the link you sent, Marxist.org
It was almost biblical in nature, "Make the Earth a common treasury".
Fascinating read, thank you.

Very few people these days would be able to accept these ideals, and embrace that way of life.

The most telling thing and accurate about Marx and what he wrote about capital. (and capitalism) In general, the purposefully inflationary, (bubble-driven ) misuse of the powers of fiat capital in the so-called monetary system of paper money and the speculation on paper turned into money.

Any economy pays a high price for that and continues today.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

•Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
•Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Etc.

You could have saved a lot of time and just pointed out that anyone with a 32" TV screen/monitor has it better that J. D. Rockefeller or Julius Caesar.

It's obvious that any notion of relevancy is beyond either you or bozo, as would be any understanding of evolution at all.

News flash; openly advocating that the poor of today should exist as did the poor of 5,000 years ago is not most peoples' idea of evolution.

Nor is it any thinking person's idea of evolution that we still have political parties today that promote policies which advocate inducement to the private sector which sustain a level poverty far beyond what evolution would otherwise have it.

As I have said numerous times before: If you don't like poor people, then quit voting for the assholes who are hell-bent on creating more of them.

(if u don't have an address u cant register to vote.) ....hence why they want to create more poor people.... less voters against them.

so they as far as they are concerned those poor people don't exist....or don't need to.

So I'm not surprised they think poor people have milddle-class amenities.... they don't see the ACTUALLY poorest people in the first place....

Well in the future 'those people' who as far as the right is concerned, are not like 'you and me' will in the future, be 'useless eaters or expendable containers' the key words being useless and expendable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

Imagine if the world was set up so that you had no 'rights' and if you fell into certain 'categories' you were loaded on an airbus and shipped somewhere they think you could be most 'productive'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

Imagine if the world was set up so that you had no 'rights' and if you fell into certain 'categories' you were loaded on an airbus and shipped somewhere they think you could be most 'productive'.

Why should I imagine that Tamaka. Are you suggesting, like the idiocy a few posts above that we on the right all have a conspiracy to bring that about? That's a left wing Che thing. Except for Che enjoyed watching people he arrested put before a firing squad so much he wouldn't ship people out anywhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

•Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
•Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Etc.

You could have saved a lot of time and just pointed out that anyone with a 32" TV screen/monitor has it better that J. D. Rockefeller or Julius Caesar.

It's obvious that any notion of relevancy is beyond either you or bozo, as would be any understanding of evolution at all.

News flash; openly advocating that the poor of today should exist as did the poor of 5,000 years ago is not most peoples' idea of evolution.

Nor is it any thinking person's idea of evolution that we still have political parties today that promote policies which advocate inducement to the private sector which sustain a level poverty far beyond what evolution would otherwise have it.

As I have said numerous times before: If you don't like poor people, then quit voting for the assholes who are hell-bent on creating more of them.

(if u don't have an address u cant register to vote.) ....hence why they want to create more poor people.... less voters against them.

so they as far as they are concerned those poor people don't exist....or don't need to.

So I'm not surprised they think poor people have milddle-class amenities.... they don't see the ACTUALLY poorest people in the first place....

Well in the future 'those people' who as far as the right is concerned, are not like 'you and me' will in the future, be 'useless eaters or expendable containers' the key words being useless and expendable.

That is hateful idiocy to get attention.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini
I have never been in "love" with unbridled capitalism.
When it goes too far, and is "unbridled" you end up with places like the USA.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini
I have never been in "love" with unbridled capitalism.
When it goes too far, and is "unbridled" you end up with places like the USA.

we don't have "unbridled capitalism" here.

we have markets, businesses and interactions that are heavily regulated and in some cases distorted by government.

we also have a fairly large degree of enforced collectivism.