Topics List Inbox Friends Search Admin Information  
 You are not logged in.   
Username: Password: Register

Message

 Search For:

TOPIC: Social Issues and Politics
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 23, 2008 4:33:32 PM 
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...

THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all.  What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.

"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
  [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:20:47 AM)
1 Messages Displayed.