Wage Slavery? The poor are poor because....

[Geilinor]

Social welfare + mixed economy + representative democracy + human rights = social democracy

Social democracy involves the repression of human rights, not the stimulus of it. Stealing half of someone's income to give to others is compromising the individual's natural rights to self-ownership.

Taxes don't compromise ownership over your body.

[Brickistan]

Point taken.

However, I would suggest that in most (if not all) historical cases, it has been because the difference was much greater than that. And it is that difference that creates the poverty in the first place. There's only so much wealth to go around (well, you could just start the printing press, but then you'd soon run into very serious problems with inflation) so the bigger the difference - i.e. the more wealth is concentrated in the hands of the wealthy elite - the more poverty you will see among the rest of the population.

Mercantilist populist nonsense. Wealth is not money, wealth is goods and services and resources and consumer items, and more of it is created all the time. The global poor control a very small slice of the economic pie - a pie that is expanding in size all the time. Surely it is better for a poor man to be better off amongst millions of other individuals than it is for a poor man to be worse off with control of more of his nation's wealth?

And worse, this is a spiral in which the wealthy will increasingly suck up the remaining wealth while the rest of the population will get poorer and poorer. And as that happens, crime-rates and unrest goes up. And indeed, that's currently the case in America where the inequality is absolutely massive.

Again, these assertions are totally false. In the last three decades, the American poor have gotten much richer, not poorer. The creation of wealth benefits everybody. And I believe that general crime rates in America have been declining since the 90s.

And speaking as someone who also grew up relatively poor (though you never get really poor in a welfare state like Denmark) what really riles me up is the fact that the rich are rigging the game. If we all had a chance at success, then I would not begrudge those who succeeded and got wealthy - it's been well and truly earned. But when see the rich elite, particularly in America, buying politicians and constantly lobbying to the point where the rest of the country is entirely ignored, then we have really big issues. How can you succeed when the game is rigged so thoroughly against you?

If you want to stop 'the rich' (which in itself is an extremely vague term) from rigging the game, then you'd push for the abolition of government. Everyone has a chance at success, even in the contemporary corporatist climate.

Will provide sources when I get back to my computer.

Goods and services are absolutely worthless if you can't afford them.

As for much richer - hardly. The cake is expanding, yes, but the vast overwhelming part of it goes to the rich elite. And mind you, expanding the cake is currently, to a large degree, done via speculation and bubbles. And those have a tendency to make the rich even richer (as they have the money to invest) while hurting the middle class (as the real wages stagnate, even drop) who cannot afford to speculate and who see an increasing amount of their money bound up in basic necessities.

And finally... Abolish the government...?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH...

Wait...

You're not serious, are you?

Thanks, but no thanks. I don't want to live in the "dream world" of some mad an-cap where rich feudal lords rule with an iron fist over the rest. I wold like to keep the middleages where they belong - in the history books.

As has been so amply demonstrated over the last decade in America, we need more regulation, not less. Deregulation played a very large part in the 2008 crash and further deregulation will only make it worse.

Social welfare + mixed economy + representative democracy + human rights = social democracy

Social democracy involves the repression of human rights, not the stimulus of it. Stealing half of someone's income to give to others is compromising the individual's natural rights to self-ownership.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH...

Wait...

You're not serious, are you?

You are...?

Really...?

Look, I've lived in a social-democracy my entire life. And I can assure that that my rights aren't being repressed.

As for the "tax is theft" argument... Give me a break, will you? That has been debunked so many times now that I'm not going to bother doing it again.

[European Socialist Republic]

As has been so amply demonstrated over the last decade in America, we need more regulation, not less. Deregulation played a very large part in the 2008 crash and further deregulation will only make it worse.

You don't get it, do you? If we deregulate the economy and a crash happens that means there's still too much regulation! So we have to deregulate even more!

[Hooven-Pawed Zone]

poor people are poor because the don't have enough money. the reason for that tends to vary from person to person.

there is no reason why we cant have education through college for free. there is no reason we cant have a higher minimum wage. there is no reason we can't have more training programs for work skills. there is no reason we cant stop turning victimless crimes into felonies that follow you for the rest of your life.

there is nothing wrong with allowing people to become rich but there needs to be a mechanism for the rest of us to be able to get by. regulated capitalism is a good system.

Capitalism of any sort isn't "good", it is one of the main problems. It is incompatible with a morally just society and must be destroyed in all of its forms.

Communism is never as good as it sounds.

[Llamalandia]

Social democracy involves the repression of human rights, not the stimulus of it. Stealing half of someone's income to give to others is compromising the individual's natural rights to self-ownership.

Taxes don't compromise ownership over your body.

No but they do so compromise it in an indirect way by not allowing one to keep the fruits of one's labor which is the result of utilizing the body.

[Divair2]

Yes, it is.

How is it social democracy?

Do you even know what social democracy is?

[Bezombia]

Taxes don't compromise ownership over your body.

No but they do so compromise it in an indirect way by not allowing one to keep the fruits of one's labor which is the result of utilizing the body.

So you'd rather pave your own roads?

[European Socialist Republic]

No but they do so compromise it in an indirect way by not allowing one to keep the fruits of one's labor which is the result of utilizing the body.

So you'd rather pave your own roads?

Let private corporations build roads! It's not like they'd turn them into toll roads...

[Bezombia]

So you'd rather pave your own roads?

Let private corporations build roads! It's not like they'd turn them into toll roads...

Not even regarding that tolls on roads are somehow different from taxation...


...unless, and this is a radical idea, the ancaps only want "economic freedom" when it suits them.

[The Liberated Territories]

Because the poor are stupid.

...

What? Poor people have generally lower IQs.

[Divair2]

Because the poor are stupid.

...

What? Poor people have generally lower IQs.

IQ is a worthless measurement.

[Llamalandia]

So you'd rather pave your own roads?

Let private corporations build roads! It's not like they'd turn them into toll roads...

And so what? Toll roads are great and many cases probably better maintained. You get what you pay for. I mean realistically, toll roads are likely a better way to collect revenue than excise tax, after all you don't use a lawn mower on the the highway but yet, the gas you buy to but in that lawnmower is used to pay to maintain the roads.

[Nervium]

Because the poor are stupid.

...

What? Poor people have generally lower IQs.

So social darwinism.
Good pick, now I know who never to debate with.

Also, you're wrong, poor people have less resources to get decent education.
Education and intelligence although slightly related, are not the same.

[The Sotoan Union]

Because the poor are stupid.

...

What? Poor people have generally lower IQs.

Can the argument be made that not having access to the same level of education as richer people hurts them, and that they aren't inherently less intelligent? I mean part of an IQ test is math test for example.

[Divair2]

Because the poor are stupid.

...

What? Poor people have generally lower IQs.

Can the argument be made that not having access to the same level of education as richer people hurts them, and that they aren't inherently less intelligent? I mean part of an IQ test is math test for example.

Which is why IQ is a worthless measurement.

[The Liberated Territories]

Because the poor are stupid.

...

What? Poor people have generally lower IQs.

So social darwinism.
Good pick, now I know who never to debate with.

Also, you're wrong, poor people have less resources to get decent education.
Education and intelligence although slightly related, are not the same.

Then you just proved it right there. It doesn't take much of an education to be wise with your money. It may help, but if you are buying 52" screen TVs and yet are poor, then you aren't that smart at all. (As an example). But if you are careful with your money and work fairly hard, then you can probably avoid starving. Probably.

[Viritica]

How is it social democracy?

Do you even know what social democracy is?

Yes. It's democracy with the goal of establishing socialism.

Not sure how welfare automatically entails social democracy.

[Bythibus]

Can the argument be made that not having access to the same level of education as richer people hurts them, and that they aren't inherently less intelligent? I mean part of an IQ test is math test for example.

Which is why IQ is a worthless measurement.

*sigh* NSG has an obsession with absolute terms. It is not worthless, it is just not an absolute measurement. IQ is actually a pretty good indicator of one's facilities, as it's divided up into sections based on different areas of logic. (i.e spacial, arithmatic, etc.)

The issue comes when one tries to put more weight on what the IQ actually holds, which is nothing more than a recommendation sticker.

[Nervium]

So social darwinism.
Good pick, now I know who never to debate with.

Also, you're wrong, poor people have less resources to get decent education.
Education and intelligence although slightly related, are not the same.

Then you just proved it right there. It doesn't take much of an education to be wise with your money. It may help, but if you are buying 52" screen TVs and yet are poor, then you aren't that smart at all. (As an example). But if you are careful with your money and work fairly hard, then you can probably avoid starving. Probably.

See kids, the social darwinist in it's natural habitat, let's not rustle it.

And no, I didn't prove anything to you, I basically said that education will further you in life, making it possible to have a big paycheck and all, and being poor, it's not that easy to get a higher education. Intelligence doesn't come in to it.

[European Socialist Republic]

Do you even know what social democracy is?

Yes. It's democracy with the goal of establishing socialism.

Not sure how welfare automatically entails social democracy.

Well, there seem to be two common definitions of social democracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

1) A political ideology that officially has as its goal the establishment of democratic socialism through reformist and gradualist methods.
2) A policy regime involving a universal welfare state and collective bargaining schemes within the framework of a capitalist economy.

[Valkalan]

While the rich have gotten richer, so have the poor. They have access to air conditioning, clothes, and clean water among countless other luxuries that were not afforded to commoners for countless generations past. According to the World Health Organization Coronary artery disease (listed as Ischaemic heart disease) and stroke were the two leading causes of death in 2000 and 2011. Associated risk factors for both include obesity and sedentary lifestyles which are significant health concerns in much of the developed world. Originally the poor suffered from too little food, but now many suffer from too much. An ever increasing proportion of the labor force is employed in the service sector performing simple office related tasks that can hardly be considered laborious. Much of the world remains undeveloped, however these trends are on the rise in developing nations.

Is there poverty? Sure. However one must bear in mind that certain technological advancements, most of which were encouraged by market forces, have made the world a far more agreeable place to live and work for all levels of society.

[Nervium]

Which is why IQ is a worthless measurement.

*sigh* NSG has an obsession with absolute terms. It is not worthless, it is just not an absolute measurement. IQ is actually a pretty good indicator of one's facilities, as it's divided up into sections based on different areas of logic. (i.e spacial, arithmatic, etc.)

The issue comes when one tries to put more weight on what the IQ actually holds, which is nothing more than a recommendation sticker.

IQ also has nothing to do with education, you know, that stuff that tends to get you better jobs.

[Viritica]

Yes. It's democracy with the goal of establishing socialism.

Not sure how welfare automatically entails social democracy.

Well, there seem to be two common definitions of social democracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

1) A political ideology that officially has as its goal the establishment of democratic socialism through reformist and gradualist methods.
2) A policy regime involving a universal welfare state and collective bargaining schemes within the framework of a capitalist economy.

Yes, but people here seem to think that welfare automatically entails social democracy.

It's doesn't.

[Duvniask]

Because the poor are stupid.

...

What? Poor people have generally lower IQs.

What the fuck do you know about being poor?

This is making me way angrier than it should, but Jesus Christ.

[Divair2]

Do you even know what social democracy is?

Yes. It's democracy with the goal of establishing socialism.

Not sure how welfare automatically entails social democracy.

No, that's democratic socialism.