Democratic Socialism in the U.S and How to Pay for It?

[The Republic of Fore]

1.No It's not. 2.And no they don't. 3.Anybody who says "but poor people exist!" Should have give up everything they have to help the less fortunate.

1. Yes it is, or do you not consider 43 million people in poverty as an issue?
2. Yes they do. Most don't even use their money, they tend to just hoard it.
3. No they shouldn't, only the people who are capable of doing so should (Which means most people who are well off).

1. That's about 1/8 of our population. Not too bad really.
2. So what? That's not your business.
3. Yes they should. If you're going to brag about how morally superior you are because you mentioned that a problem exists, either you do something to fix that problem or be quiet. Unless of course you just pretend to care in order to have an excuse to say "give me free stuff."

[New haven america]

First of all, no human being deserves to have anywhere near that amount of money whilst there are people starving to death in this world for want of it.

The number of people in poverty has fallen from 95% in 1820 to approx. 10% nowadays, hence this is an ever diminishing excuse for capital accumulation, most people are poor nowadays because they didn't invest on their human capital property, nor saved and invested.

Haven't we already been over the fact that you don't understand what "Living paycheck to paycheck" means?

Here's a hint: It means you have absolutely no money to invest or save.

[Torrocca]

3. Yes they should. If you're going to brag about how morally superior you are because you mentioned that a problem exists, either you do something to fix that problem or be quiet. Unless of course you just pretend to care in order to have an excuse to say "give me free stuff."

Forcing the rich to support society's poorest is a way of fixing that problem by proxy. :^)

[Thermodolia]

Good luck being fooled by checking up local currency units rather than digging the conversion thoroughly.

Thanks for making it known you didn't check your source in depth there :^)



See how it says, "USD," in there, implying a conversion of units? Because I sure did.

That’s roughly $9 a DAY not an hour but a whole day. That’s really shit

[Torrocca]

Thanks for making it known you didn't check your source in depth there :^)



See how it says, "USD," in there, implying a conversion of units? Because I sure did.

That’s roughly $9 a DAY not an hour but a whole day. That’s really shit

Mentioned exactly that earlier. It's a pain.

[Thanatttynia]

1. Yes it is, or do you not consider 43 million people in poverty as an issue?
2. Yes they do. Most don't even use their money, they tend to just hoard it.
3. No they shouldn't, only the people who are capable of doing so should (Which means most people who are well off).

1. That's about 1/8 of our population. Not too bad really.
2. So what? That's not your business.
3. Yes they should. If you're going to brag about how morally superior you are because you mentioned that a problem exists, either you do something to fix that problem or be quiet. Unless of course you just pretend to care in order to have an excuse to say "give me free stuff."

In my experience, paranoia about people who are proposing ethical solutions thinking themselves morally superior usually indicates an internalised but unacknowledged understanding that your position is morally indefensible.

[Senkaku]

Thanks for making it known you didn't check your source in depth there :^)



See how it says, "USD," in there, implying a conversion of units? Because I sure did.

That’s roughly $9 a DAY not an hour but a whole day. That’s really shit

Yes, that was the metric being discussed, they're talking about global poverty not the American minimum wage (a bit of a threadjack tbh)

[New haven america]

1. Yes it is, or do you not consider 43 million people in poverty as an issue?
2. Yes they do. Most don't even use their money, they tend to just hoard it.
3. No they shouldn't, only the people who are capable of doing so should (Which means most people who are well off).

1. That's about 1/8 of our population. Not too bad really.
2. So what? That's not your business.
3. Yes they should. If you're going to brag about how morally superior you are because you mentioned that a problem exists, either you do something to fix that problem or be quiet. Unless of course you just pretend to care in order to have an excuse to say "give me free stuff."

1. No it's not, that's bad. You could actually star a revolution with those numbers.
2. Yes it is, and it should be everyone's business.
3. Actually, I'm part of that 43 million, so I have nothing to give. But if I did have something to give, you bet your ass I would.

[Novas Arcanum]

It would be more affordable to enact universal health care than to keep the current system we have right now the only thing stopping Americans is Americans themselves.

[Thermodolia]

1. Yes it is, or do you not consider 43 million people in poverty as an issue?
2. Yes they do. Most don't even use their money, they tend to just hoard it.
3. No they shouldn't, only the people who are capable of doing so should (Which means most people who are well off).

1. That's about 1/8 of our population. Not too bad really.

That’s high enough for a revolution. That’s not a number we want. Those who don’t have a lot of money turn to crime or are radicalized. And I’d rather not have 43 million fifth Columns in the US.

[New haven america]

1. That's about 1/8 of our population. Not too bad really.
2. So what? That's not your business.
3. Yes they should. If you're going to brag about how morally superior you are because you mentioned that a problem exists, either you do something to fix that problem or be quiet. Unless of course you just pretend to care in order to have an excuse to say "give me free stuff."

In my experience, paranoia about people who are proposing ethical solutions thinking themselves morally superior usually indicates an internalised but unacknowledged understanding that your position is morally indefensible.

Either that, or they live decently enough that don't have to deal with the problems most other people do, and thus don't find what they're going through to be actual issues.

Honestly, I have never met a poor Libertarian. I'm sure they're out there, but I haven't seen one.

[Senkaku]

Bull fuckin' shit it's only 10%.

Considering the fact that you can unironically live a good life on many african countries with approx. $1.00-1.50 a day, $2.50 a day sounds pretty good

Define "a good life" lol

Good luck being fooled by checking up local currency units rather than digging the conversion thoroughly.

Thanks for making it known you didn't check your source in depth there :^)



See how it says, "USD," in there, implying a conversion of units? Because I sure did.

OUCH

Zimbabwe, the lowest fucking one on that list, has a living wage for individuals of $275/month, or over $9/day. That's a fucking lie you're stating right there.

Ghana: $4.63/day
Egypt: $2.05/day
Zambia: $7.41/day
Mozambique: $3.51/day
South Africa: $15.72/day
Kenya: $8.12/day
Nigeria: $3.67/day
Angola: $7.28/day
Senegal: $5.09/day
Niger: $5.72/day
Togo: $6.45/day
Burundi: $4.39/day

This is of course accounting for solely individual costs, which have a heavy burden given the overhead costs that fall upon a single person. When you factor in the family living wage (which is more realistic as per the high fertility rate in Africa) then the costs are way lower.

I'd be interested to see you head somewhere like these countries and try living on $2.50/day, just to tell us how it is, since you say you can live such a wonderful life or whatever lol

[The Republic of Fore]

Since he came out of a household with a net worth dangerously near zero, pretty much yes

Only if you think coming into any wealth at all that you don't inherit qualifies as earning it.

TIL that if you're successful you're unethical and should proceed to be called as the scourge of the earth for creating jobs and increasing economic efficiency

At his level, pretty much.

Investment is to greed as being paid to do people's homework is exploitation of the less smart students, Bezos made good investments and his wealth progressed on an exponential-ish pace due to the natural effect of compound returns over capital

You're trying to compare economics and ethics. Ethics and capitalism don't mix well, granted. I'm not saying Bezos doesn't know how to further his own aims under capitalism, he evidently does. What I'm saying is that that is unethical.

When you're an entrepreneurial genius it's quite possible yeah

Lol in a world where children are dying... one man exploits labour on a scale no one has seen before...
If you sincerely believe being 'an entrepreneurial genius' means you deserve to be this obscenely wealthy whilst concurrently people are dying because they do not have enough money to live then I don't know what to tell you other than that your morality is way off

Amazon employs lowly skilled labor by large, which is demonstrably true by the comparatively low productivity of each worker in there. Low skills ~= low productivity = low pay, not that hard to understand

Even by the rules of neoliberal capitalism they're particularly exploitative and unscrupulous. They rely on their size to underprice other competitors, they dodge taxes, and, yes, they underpay and overwork their workers. I could go on but I think your love for Bezos is clouding your judgment over what are and what aren't morally acceptable things to do.

First of all, that isn't his problem. Nobody owes help to anyone else. I have a new idea for a class though. Let's call it "bringing up the fact that something exists doesn't make you morally superior". Because bringing fact that suffering people exist just to have an excuse to demand someone else give you their money is the highest hypocrisy. How much have you done to help them? Why don't you give up everything you have? Many people around the world could say you don't deserve it. And before you say "but he has more". No, you're the one who demanded others hand over their wealth. So practice what you preach, or be quiet.

I don't want any of Bezos' money. I have no money of my own, I'm a minor. My family has no money in relation to what other people in my developed country have, but in comparison to the majority of people on the planet, of course, we're wealthy. You make a salient point there - the world is a horrifyingly unequal place which we should all do our utmost to help make better. We don't have any disposable income, though. Bezos on the other hand... billions in disposable income, which he could burn tomorrow and not care about.

I'm not demanding anyone give up any of their money to anyone else. I'm simply stating the fact that it's unethical to be a billionaire whilst there are people dying because they do not have enough money. If you're offended by that, I have to ask are you yourself Jeff Bezos? If you aren't, I have to wonder what on earth would possess you to care about his wealth.

It's interesting you claim to know how net worth works, then claim bezos has billions in disposable income. Because no. He literally doesn't. Nobody ever has. And yes, by saying "we should tax rich people" you are demanding others give up their money. I'm literally saying that the fact that bad things happen is not someone's problem just because they have money. I don't care about his wealth. I care about hypocrites who piss and moan about what others should do, when they've done nothing themselves. Which is more useful? Volunteering at a crisis center for rape victims, or moaning about how *if insert rich person* paid more taxes we could do more to help rape victims? Side note, as an American I have literally no reason to people Dems would just raise taxes on the wealthy. Politicians literally lie for a living.

[Thanatttynia]

In my experience, paranoia about people who are proposing ethical solutions thinking themselves morally superior usually indicates an internalised but unacknowledged understanding that your position is morally indefensible.

Either that, or they live decently enough that don't have to deal with the problems other people do, and thus don't find what they're going through to be an actual issue.

Honestly, I have never met a poor Libertarian.

That's true. I guess if you have a lack of empathy, personal experience is the only barometer for wider human existence. If your experience then has been 'I've never wanted for anything that I haven't gone on to receive' I can see why 'poor people are poor because they are deficient' starts to make sense.

[Great Minarchistan]

Did I say that they where bad? I said that they are crooked. That’s a fact.

Making good investments is crooked, reminder that if you go bankrupt then you are a legitimate citizen

Nope. But hey under my rule at the US won’t be living with mass unemployment.

Nice economic ignorance

[Thanatttynia]

It's interesting you claim to know how net worth works, then claim bezos has billions in disposable income. Because no. He literally doesn't. Nobody ever has. And yes, by saying "we should tax rich people" you are demanding others give up their money. I'm literally saying that the fact that bad things happen is not someone's problem just because they have money. I don't care about his wealth. I care about hypocrites who piss and moan about what others should do, when they've done nothing themselves. Which is more useful? Volunteering at a crisis center for rape victims, or moaning about how *if insert rich person* paid more taxes we could do more to help rape victims? Side note, as an American I have literally no reason to people Dems would just raise taxes on the wealthy. Politicians literally lie for a living.

I was being hyperbolic, I would have thought that was obvious to someone who understands how net worth works.

If I had disposable income to give to people less fortunate than me, I would give to people less fortunate than me, because I wouldn't need it. I don't, so I don't. I'm not seeing how supporting the idea of a tax on the wealthy makes me a hypocrite. I'm confident that if I were wealthy, I would happily be taxed up to my ears to pay for public programs that helped the most vulnerable in our society.

Personally, what I think is hypocritical is living in a society and reaping the benefits of doing so and then turning round and pissing and moaning about the prospect of extremely wealthy individuals who do not need or deserve the amount of money they have being taxed more to pay for programs that help society.

Both things can be useful, and bad things happening to other people is everyone's problem. If you insist on channeling everything through your own narrow perspective then consider that no man is an island; everything that happens in this world affects all of us. Being selfish and greedy makes the world a worse place. Giving up your time is a nice thing to do, as is encouraging wealthier people to give up their time and/or money.

[Thermodolia]

Did I say that they where bad? I said that they are crooked. That’s a fact.

Making good investments is crooked, reminder that if you go bankrupt then you are a legitimate citizen

A lot of rich people are corrupt yes. So what.

Nope. But hey under my rule at the US won’t be living with mass unemployment.

Nice economic ignorance

I’m sure that laissez-faire capitalism and neo liberalism is better lol

[Costa Fierro]

We could just take out a little bit of the Military's $600+ billion budget and put it into social systems and programs.

Even if we take $100 billion from them, we'd still be the highest spender bar none.

$100 billion means a lot. Roughly around 50 % of all the Military budget goes into US Service member salary alone. So since we cannot touch the salary of any service member then equipment and mission capability will be the next target. Something will catastrophically go, either that will force the closure of bases overseas, cancel the maintenance/procurement of new equipment, reduce force projection in naval military capabilities, air force maintenance/crashes will probably go rise.

Just look at what isn't necessary military spending. Starting with military contractors.

[Great Minarchistan]

Only if you think coming into any wealth at all that you don't inherit qualifies as earning it.

TIL that being smart is bad

At his level, pretty much.

So a morally ideal system is one who has people stuck on poverty due to low economic efficiency and widespread malinvestments, hooray

You're trying to compare economics and ethics. Ethics and capitalism don't mix well, granted.

This can be said to socialism, anarchism, fascism and any other proponent of another economic system. So it's not an individual quality to capitalism.

I'm not saying Bezos doesn't know how to further his own aims under capitalism, he evidently does. What I'm saying is that that is unethical.

til that expanding job creation and wealth generation is bad

Lol in a world where children are dying... one man exploits labour on a scale no one has seen before...

What an exploitative country, where child mortality has been reduced by 90% over less than a century!

If you sincerely believe being 'an entrepreneurial genius' means you deserve to be this obscenely wealthy whilst concurrently people are dying because they do not have enough money to live then I don't know what to tell you other than that your morality is way off

Bezos has his whole money invested, which contributes to create jobs. Can't see how contributing to social progress while being rich is obscene.

Even by the rules of neoliberal capitalism they're particularly exploitative and unscrupulous.

[insert vague loaded statement that doesn't mean anything at all]

They rely on their size to underprice other competitors

Size doesn't mean everything, especially when factoring economies of scale and the fact that they represent only 40% of e-commerce and a minuscule 5% of total retail.

they dodge taxes

Their profit isn't even large enough to cut for a corporate tax, but of course it's dodging if they're abiding taxation laws

and, yes, they underpay and overwork their workers.

Then why don't their workers move elsewhere? Especially under a period where unemployment for unskilled people has been near 5%, long term (>27 weeks) probably at 1.5 or 2% and job vacancies are popping up everywhere.

I could go on but I think your love for Bezos is clouding your judgment over what are and what aren't morally acceptable things to do.

Your ideal of the "simple poor man" just makes your judgment hazy enough for you to ignore the fact that he himself was raised straight out of poverty. You claim to be for social progress but you despise the model of individual that becomes successful through it.

[Great Minarchistan]

You are aware that those "Self-made Millionaires/Billionaires" aren't really self made, correct?

Self-made is defined as not having it's wealth stemming from inheritance.

Usually what happens is that they have parents or family who are upper-middle class

Around 20% of America is upper middle, why don't we have 20% of the population as millionaires?

[Costa Fierro]

Well we don’t have to have a single payer system.

We can have a National Healthcare Corporation and a National Pharmaceutical Corporation while also having having private and worker owned Co-ops as well

New Zealand is actually a good example of a hybrid system.

[Torrocca]

Nice economic ignorance

I’m sure that laissez-faire capitalism and neo liberalism is better lol

It is until you mention the Gilded Age and then suddenly that's either A) not real Capitalism, B) not laissez-faire because a minute bit of gubmint interference, C) not real Capitalism, or D) not real Capitalism.

[Great Minarchistan]

Good luck being fooled by checking up local currency units rather than digging the conversion thoroughly.

Thanks for making it known you didn't check your source in depth there :^)



See how it says, "USD," in there, implying a conversion of units? Because I sure did.

Yeah, somehow Zimbabwe has the lowest individual living cost when Egypt has it at $2, 3/4ths less than Zimbabwe. Would you mind putting effort on your arguments and stop this intellectual dishonesty?

[Great Minarchistan]

A lot of rich people are corrupt yes. So what.

[insert vague statement that doesn't mean anything]
Your claim is as valid as saying that a lot of poor people are poor because of their own life choices.

I’m sure that laissez-faire capitalism and neo liberalism is better lol

Well, apparently the "neoliberal capitalist" America has survived the Armageddon of automation ever since 1950s without any changes on the consistently of the job market

[New haven america]

You are aware that those "Self-made Millionaires/Billionaires" aren't really self made, correct?

1.Self-made is defined as not having it's wealth stemming from inheritance.

Usually what happens is that they have parents or family who are upper-middle class

2.Around 20% of America is upper middle, why don't we have 20% of the population as millionaires?

1. And those people don't have their wealth stemming from inheritance, doesn't mean that they actually earned their money on their own.
2. 5% of the US are millionaires and that number is continually growing, usually from that 20% of that upper middle class.

If you think just because one demographic that influences another would be the exact same, then you need to retake math classes (And while your at it, I'd also recommend some sociology classes, as you are for to disconnected with how modern America works).