Re: And this is suprising why? -

Author	All Replies
Shark_615 join:2006-01-17 Pickering, ON	reply to G_Poobah Re: And this is suprising why? Discriminating based on the ability to pay is what made this country what it is, its called Capitalism. Try Russia I heard communism turned out really well.
	to forum · permalink · 2006-02-02 10:25:15 ·

pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD	said by Shark_615: Try Russia I heard communism turned out really well. Don't you mean the USSR? Oh wait. That country doesn't exist anymore. Why is that? BECAUSE THE USA RULES! LOL Actually, Russia has started embracing more capitalistic ideals such as charging market rates for natural resources and flat income taxation. Once they stop jailing CEOs who don't support the government they might be poised for even more growth. -- Rove / Rumsfeld 2008!
	to forum · permalink · 2006-02-02 10:30:07 ·
bmn ? ? ? Premium,ExMod 2003-06 join:2001-03-15 hiatus	reply to Shark_615 said by Shark_615: Discriminating based on the ability to pay is what made this country what it is, its called Capitalism. Hate to tell you this, but that's not always a good thing... -- Too logical to be a conservative... Too practical to be a liberal... Too realistic to be a Libertarian.
	to forum · permalink · 2006-02-02 11:47:44 ·
pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD	said by bmn: Hate to tell you this, but that's not always a good thing... Capitalism isn't perfect, but it is the only economic system out there which allows for as many people as possible to become rich. -- Rove / Rumsfeld 2008!
	to forum · permalink · 2006-02-02 13:21:03 ·
bmn ? ? ? Premium,ExMod 2003-06 join:2001-03-15 hiatus	said by pnh102: Capitalism isn't perfect, but it is the only economic system out there which allows for as many people as possible to become rich. And the number of people who become rich is only slightly more in capitalism that it is in other economies... The number of people in the upper income bracket isn't getting any larger in a big hurry. And such a statement only matters to those people who think that wealth is a valid measure of worth. -- Too logical to be a conservative... Too practical to be a liberal... Too realistic to be a Libertarian.
	to forum · permalink · 2006-02-02 15:39:41 ·
pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD	said by bmn: And the number of people who become rich is only slightly more in capitalism that it is in other economies... The number of people in the upper income bracket isn't getting any larger in a big hurry. Nope. For the longest time, the USA has had one of the highest per-capita GDPs in the world. We're also the 4th largest country population-wise. Given those factors, its only logical to conclude that there is a lot of money spread out amongst a lot of people in this country. The 3 countries that rank above the USA all have far fewer people against which to divide an even smaller GDP. Many socialist countries, especially some of those in Western Europe, are far below the USA in terms of per capita GDP. Capitalism is the only way by which the USA became so rich in a relatively short amount of time (~200-300 years) compared to other established countries which have been around longer. Other countries which mimic our capitalist system have seen significant gains in wealth. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that if you want to have a rich society, then free market capitalism is the way to go. said by bmn: And such a statement only matters to those people who think that wealth is a valid measure of worth. Wealth is the only valid measure of worth. I'd be funny to see someone try paying the mortgage, rent, car payment, loan payments, grocery bills, utility bills or any other expense with something other than wealth. -- Rove / Rumsfeld 2008!
	to forum · permalink · 2006-02-02 17:00:09 ·
bmn ? ? ? Premium,ExMod 2003-06 join:2001-03-15 hiatus 1 edit	said by pnh102: said by bmn: And the number of people who become rich is only slightly more in capitalism that it is in other economies... The number of people in the upper income bracket isn't getting any larger in a big hurry. Nope. For the longest time, the USA has had one of the highest per-capita GDPs in the world. We're also the 4th largest country population-wise. Given those factors, its only logical to conclude that there is a lot of money spread out amongst a lot of people in this country. Once again, oversimplification... Per capita GDP is a measure not without its problems and if you use it without context, you end up with the picture you paint. The problem with per capita GDP is that it ignores the fact that wealth isn't even close to be evenly distributed. A majority of the wealth of the US is held by a small minority of the population. So while per capita GDP may be high, the amount each person actually holds of that pie is nowhere near that. said by bmn: And such a statement only matters to those people who think that wealth is a valid measure of worth. Wealth is the only valid measure of worth. I'd be funny to see someone try paying the mortgage, rent, car payment, loan payments, grocery bills, utility bills or any other expense with something other than wealth. So, by that assertion then, a person without little or no money is a worthless human being regardless of what they contribute? Your assertion is only true if your method of determining worth is so narrow as to only include ecomomic factors. However, it ignores contribution. For example, people who work very low paying jobs and have very little, are of great necessity in our modern society. Without them, you would have plugged drains and sewers, trash piling up in the streets, etc. Using wealth alone would mean that a lazy person like Paris Hilton, for example, is somehow worth more than someone who actually works their ass off purely by having had rich parents. Using wealth to determine worth by itself ignores other equally important factors. Not to mention that "worth" is a purely subjective measure... -- Too logical to be a conservative... Too practical to be a liberal... Too realistic to be a Libertarian.
	to forum · permalink · 2006-02-02 17:26:38 ·

Verizon: 'Bandwidth Hog'? > And this is suprising why?

Re: And this is suprising why?