Capitalism

http://www.justiceplus.org/capitalist.htm

Poverty in the world is caused by a lack of capitalism.  China's economy is only now starting to grow because of AMERICAN corporations stepping in, and giving them jobs, and in general, income of capital.

>>120 I only assess people when it is necessary for me to take a stance. I simply avoid judgement because I don't trust my mind to be objective if I start from an emotional position.

>>121

Precisely. >>120's ideal of love sounds entirely fucked up. It might work in marriage or friendship. But applied to the whole human race? It's best to love them because they exist. The most virtuous examples of mankind are people who perscribed to this: Jesus, Ghandi, Mother Theresa, etc

>>118
Answer this Xel you ignorant asswipe. Time for you to come to terms with the fact that you are a stupid fuck!

>>122
Jesus, Ghandi, and Mother Theresa?  So you love them the most? Hmm... ok. 

Let's imagine two worlds.  One filled with the following kinds of people: 

Bill Gates, Einstein, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Andrew Carnegie, Aristotle, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Mozart, Bach, Mark Twain, Nikola Tesla, etc.

The other world is filled with selfless people with an indiscriminate love for all humanity:  "Jesus, Ghandi, Mother Theresa, etc."

Which world would you choose?

>>124
World one.  I'm an athiest though.

>>122
It's best? Forget what is 'best.'  Go with what is true. 

What qualities do you look for in the people you love?

>>126
My kind of person would be one who is:  intelligent, self-reliant, has individuality, and a high self-esteem based on honesty, integrity, and accomplishment, to name a few. 

Something like that.  (Not taking into account appearance.)

>>123 Take it easy anonymous. I don't believe that soc. sec can persist in its current iteration, nor do I believe it is principally wrong. It's kinda what >>112 said; we can't allow automatic segregation to accumulate. But government must be limited, consumers must become more empowered and aware and of course taxation is a bit of slavery when you don't reap the benefits. But as I've said; all the money you and others of your income bracket isn't made fairly, because others missed the opportunity simply by being born in the wrong place/time etc.

>>124 We don't have to choose; industry and altruism are both human aspects with bases in the limbic system. Stop pitting them against each other, that's the main reason I gave Rand the finger in the end.

>>128

How is it you guys don't understand this? Are you just stupid? You didn't get your money "fairly" because you're making it off of people who did not have the same advantages you did. Not only are the ethically implications damning, but you are also wrong if you think this is "pure capitalism". It isn't.

>>130 There is this myth about america being a better meritocracy than others, but I think their greatest factor is the flexible, demanding job market and market choice. A meritocracy it aint however, which is why soc. sec. is still justified. The system needs to be streamlined, partially privatized and slowly removed though. As long as people can get jobs and don't have to be trodden down or turned obese by the unconscionable food industry, soc. sec. can be removed and I will applaud that. For now, soc. sec. is the punishment for those that don't approach americas strengths and weaknesses w/ nuance.

xel is a smarter, calmer anti-chan without the cussing and gay jokes

>>132 It's difficult to accept a net compliment without sounding like an utter utter tool, but Thank You dude/dudette/whatever people are these days.

>>131
Many people are born into this system.  Punishing innocents is justified?

>>134 They aren't "innocent" per se, but they are reaping benefits of advantages that wouldn't have been theirs save for luck. In this case, some bracketing is justified, not paying taxes is a crime. That doesn't mean I accept the current iteration of soc. sec., I just don't believe there is a principal or philosophical case against it. And with the minimun wage at the level it is, this will just pile up. You need to pull your impoverished fellow citizens closer before you cut the cord.

>>135
Taxes are akin to slavery in my opinion.  The cord cutting should commence as quickly as possible.  Social Security, welfare, and government health care programs should be the first to go.  Following that, the wars of foreign aggression. 

>>136 They shouldn't "go" just like that. You'd have a revolution and you'd deserve it. LImiting it while changing american culture and causing new jobs, that I'm for. In the meantime you'll have to accept this diet slavery anyway, and you're not getting my vote until you offer a very detailed plan for empowering the citizen as well as the consumer.

>>137
Well, see, the problem that I see with it is, people have been paying into these programs, in many cases for a lot of their lives.  They have to.  Again, government enforces it.  I think we should look for ways to dish out the money back to those who put it in, and then close down the system, as it is obviously bloated, inefficient, and causes more problems and ills than it is worth.

>>138 Again; if you close down the system you are making an ethical slight of the highest order and the ensuing revolution will be justified. A slow but very steady removal of soc. sec. with connected changes in general society and introduction of more meritocratic ideals? I'm all for that. As long as the libertarians educate the consumer and keeps things purely secular I'm on the barricades for them. If all they can talk about is big gov, guns and soc. sec. is slavery they can go have "delicate adventures" with themselves.

>>139
Not all libertarians are for a complete separation of state and economics.  Many support changes like those you suggested there. 

>>140
Those who are for complete separation of state and economics are particular anarcho-invidualist sect known as anarcho-capitalism.

>>141
Exactly, and I was pointing out to him that not all people who vote libertarian are that extreme.  For that matter, not many libertarians APPROACH being that extreme.  A few do, but most don't.

>>142 It's just the impression I've been given by a lot of libs. There's a scary lack of nuance.

There's also a scary lack of intelligence in this thread.

>>139
"As long as the libertarians educate the consumer and keeps things purely secular I'm on the barricades for them."

What do you mean educating the consumer?

>>145 Make people independent thinkers. There is no place for companies like McDonalds for a rational consumer who takes responsibility.

>>146
How are you going to make people independent thinkers? How specifically?

I don't eat at McDonalds, ever.  I have the utmost of respect for individual rights though.  (Property rights.)

I eat at sometimes McDonalds if I need cheap food, but I'm still pure libertarian. I don't see McDonalds as evil either, but then again personally I'm computer business. Pretty sure many who are in food business find it big evil stealing their profits. I won't comment on those who find it evil for "ideological" reasons as they tend to be sad crackpots.

Libertarians are greedy fuckheads.

>>149 Stop with the generalizations. While generalizations are the goal of all endeavours of social sciences (approximations and predictions are also strived after), they are to come after years of study, cross-checking and study of pragmatic examples. You are a sort of general disturbance that doesn't really belong out of a shoutwire.com comments list.

>>148 What profit-stealing are you talking about? How can you not think that McDonalds is at least a negative force that needs to be changed by consumer outcry? Do you even exist or am I having a nightmare?
McDonalds food isn't cheap in the long run, and by taking a short-term saving on a cheap meal that offers as much nutrition as a ciggarete wrapped in bacon, you are sending yet another positive, encouraging signal to a company that will continue to harm defenseless people, just because you lacked imagination and time. Unless you spend the time saved on fast eating with writing eye-opening books, making art or shooting gay-bashers you have caused a net damage to the world.
The only "ideological" reason I don't approve of McDoanlds is that I believe in personal responsibility (which was, at my latest check, the core of libertarianism and a functioning laissez-faire state) and that it is my duty to tell capitalism what it can and can not do without reverting to crackpottery.

Xel pwns faces.

b87d3425 http://d6a994b6.com & lt;a href='http://50d6fd46.com'>e98509e0</a>; [url]http://96032ea5.com[/url] [url=http://0712709c.com]13b4fc28[/url]

>>151
Let the stupid be stupid.

>>151
P.S. I don't agree with you.

>>154 I see that the hyena is grudgingly walking away from the carcass, telling the cheetahs it never cared about the outcome anyway.
>>155 The cheetahs are really impressed and surprised by the hyenas indifference, not to mention its decision to disapprove of their tactics. The cheetahs have been pwnt by the hyenas skillful and intelligent retreat. Fascinating.

>>151
While I agree with you that McDonalds is a bad place to eat..
I'd like to stress a few things: 

"McDonalds food isn't cheap in the long run, and by taking a short-term saving on a cheap meal that offers as much nutrition as a ciggarete wrapped in bacon, you are sending yet another positive, encouraging signal to a company that will continue to harm defenseless people"

People are NOT defenseless.  I agree with you McDonalds is a negative force on humanity, and the world.  Nonetheless, people are far from defenseless.  People should know by now that McDonalds sucks, their food is unhealthy, and the practices that go into making it are a little less than savory.

Common.. if you didn't know by now that McDonalds' food is horrible for you, you didn't take the time to look at the nutrition facts, and you couldn't guess that "Double Quarter Pounders with extra cheese and a coke with a large order of french fries" is a recipe for a heart attack and possibly diabetes, you are a moron. 

Not to mention all the films that have been released on McDonalds.  For god's sake, don't act like the populous is "defenseless," even if they didn't know it was unhealthy and such by all the above reasons, they still had the opportunity to read all the articles on the net, the library, the bookstore, and definitely last but not least, see that movie SUPER SIZE ME.

I just had to point this out... people have had PLENTY of warnings about McDonalds' food... more than plenty.  If they still eat it, they deserve what comes to them. 

>>157  "People should know by now that McDonalds sucks, their food is unhealthy, and the practices that go into making it are a little less than savory." - I was talking about people in the third world and the rainforests, but now that you mention it lots of american kids are defenseless and in the protective middle class/stressed out lower class the parents are also subject to nagging and threats of children. Companies try to turn kids against their parents via advertising.

Regarding the array of info available against McWhatever, the lower class isn't capable of keeping their ears above the klaxoning of pop-"culture", advertising and their hectic lives. Plus, with public schools being what they are I seriously doubt any American know what a calory/amino acid/transfat is.
McDonalds is mostly a subconscious choice, the result of child nagging, laziness or stress. The amount of people in an area that visit McGrease is like a barometer of self-awarenees, independent thinking and IQ levels...

>>156
This has to be one of the stupidest dumb fuck analogies of all time. With wild animals intelligence isn't much of an issue. As long as humans have a serviceable level of health, intelligence is the defining darwinian factor. If you're so stupid you cannot equate eating too much fatty food with becoming morbidly obese, you deserve to suffer! There is such thing as the preservation of justice which should be the sole service provided by the government aswell as competition from other fast food stores who will want to expose the poor practices of their competitors and the free press. You are not living in a police state. If you want to whine, do it somewhere where you are not beating thin air.

In fact go to north korea right NOW and begin exposing the poor practices of Kim Jong-Il!

>>158
Oh, let's start a witch hunt, since we all subconsciously buy food at mcdonalds we are all suspects...