• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?


  • Total voters
    56
he oughta try hunting for an Iphone or gathering nuclear technology sometimes.:lamo

Yes, they obviously had any of the resources to make those thousands of years ago. Talk about illogical argumentation.
 
Show that they don't, lobbying, in regards to politics is really the main issue.

it's bad form to ask someone to show a negative.

its your claim they have "too much power"... it's a positive claim that demands substantiation.

be warned , though... it's pretty hard to define "too much"
 
Yes, they obviously had any of the resources to make those thousands of years ago. Talk about illogical argumentation.

Technically they did.
 
Yes, they obviously had any of the resources to make those thousands of years ago. Talk about illogical argumentation.

I see.. this is illogical argumentation, but presenting such a society as somehow superior to capitalism isn't. :lamo
 
I see.. this is illogical argumentation, but presenting such a society as somehow superior to capitalism isn't. :lamo

I never said it was superior to today modern's society, all I am showing is that people can work together without being greedy by nature.
 
50 cents a week is what they're worth when they produce **** loads of more value.. any citations?
Illogical and emotional response to that said.

Again;
You judge that by the local prevailing rate, just as you judge the conditions by the local requirements.

If it is only worth 0.50¢ a week, that is all it is worth.


No wonder capitalists love to move production to third world countries without labor laws/minimum wage laws.
Another lame reply.
Consumers demand inexpensive products.
You can not fault the business owner for that.
And as it is a business, profits should be maximized and if it is a Corporation it is a fiduciary responsibility.
There is nothing wrong with it.


I'm sorry, it is my business, millions are starving to death.
Lame. More emotive nonsense.
Others people money, especially that which has already been taxed, is not your business. Period.
Nothing you can say changes that.

And there are not millions starving in the US, which this topic is about.
But if you really want to help those starving in other countries go there, and for their societies sake reduce their damn population.


Manual labor is worth a dime.. the disrespect for most of the world is hilarious, billions will have to do manual labor, they deserve respect and a decent wage.
I didn't stutter. Yes it is a dime a dozen. That is reality, not disrespect, but way to go all emotive again. :doh
They have a decent wage if it is in accordance with the prevailing wage of their local.


They are not emotional appeal, ask me what I need to support and I will.
Yes they are.
Again; Go where you think you are needed and reduce their populations.


Are children receiving healthcare providing any value when they receive it? ... Many on welfare work, so I'd say they give back to capitalists.
More illogical emotive lameness.
The healthcare they receive should be provided by their parents.
Not society.


Lame statements?
Did I stutter? Your arguments are lame.


You're the one purposefully making yourself look like a dick.
See! Just more emotive lame nonsense.
It is really all you have. Truly sad.


Really? Ok, let me go down this line, let's assume all countries have access to education, the road to be successful, then we have costs, failure rates, and let alone the fact that manual labor will always exist, and people will always be doing the "worthless" jobs, such as mining, sweatshopping, apple factories, logging, service jobs.. What do you define as success? Do you think everyone just needs to WORK HARDER HARR BECAUSE A MAJORITY CAN OBVIOUSLY ALL BECOME BUSINESSMEN IN SUITS WHO DON'T DO MANUAL LABOR. That makes no sense, I'd rather acknowledge that manual labor requires skill, dedication, and manual laborers work harder then any capitalist.
More lameness.
Yes really.
Again;
Manual labor is a dime a dozen and as such is worth that.
Scarce and more skilled labor is worth more.
This is why your arguments fail.


It is my business,
No it isn't. Never will be.


Find me anything on MLK/albert einstein wanting to acquire profit.
More lameness. You need to support your assertions. Not I.


Show that they don't, lobbying, in regards to politics is really the main issue.
:lamo
I do not need to show a negative. D'oh! You have to show what you assert.
Thus far no one has shown they have too much power.
 
Illogical and emotional response to that said.

Again;
You judge that by the local prevailing rate, just as you judge the conditions by the local requirements.

If it is only worth 0.50¢ a week, that is all it is worth.


Another lame reply.
Consumers demand inexpensive products.
You can not fault the business owner for that.
And as it is a business, profits should be maximized and if it is a Corporation it is a fiduciary responsibility.
There is nothing wrong with it.


Lame. More emotive nonsense.
Others people money, especially that which has already been taxed, is not your business. Period.
Nothing you can say changes that.

And there are not millions starving in the US, which this topic is about.
But if you really want to help those starving in other countries go there, and for their societies sake reduce their damn population.


I didn't stutter. Yes it is a dime a dozen. That is reality, not disrespect, but way to go all emotive again. :doh
They have a decent wage if it is in accordance with the prevailing wage of their local.


Yes they are.
Again; Go where you think you are needed and reduce their populations.


More illogical emotive lameness.
The healthcare they receive should be provided by their parents.
Not society.


Did I stutter? Your arguments are lame.


See! Just more emotive lame nonsense.
It is really all you have. Truly sad.


More lameness.
Yes really.
Again;
Manual labor is a dime a dozen and as such is worth that.
Scarce and more skilled labor is worth more.
This is why your arguments fail.


No it isn't. Never will be.


More lameness. You need to support your assertions. Not I.


:lamo
I do not need to show a negative. D'oh! You have to show what you assert.
Thus far no one has shown they have too much power.

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/
Ok, 40 hours, at least, of labor a week by laborers in the third world, is worth 50 cents a week? You claim this hilarious bull****, you give me the evidence.
Yeah, you're not helping my case against capitalism being immoral. You admit that capitalists purposefully exploit workers? Good to know.
You can't say it's not my business, I think it is.
Really? Tell me all about these wages:
List of countries by average wage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Prevailing wage of their local? It is set by the capitalists who purposefully pay the amount needed for subsistence, sometimes, not even this.
Reduce their populations? What are you advocating here, genocide? I should mention we produce enough food to feed 10 billion people with all nutritional requirements right now, population isn't the problem :)
So, if a child with parents who can't afford healthcare (Well, we have found ways to help that now..) is hurt, should they be denied care? After all, who cares? You refuse to give a reason for why they're lame, emotional appeal isn't emotional when it is the truth. You are defining skilled labor on your own, very illogical and ignorant. Hey, you're not backing up your assertions, the MLK/einstein point is obvious.
http://www.theguardian.com/global-d...r-the-worlds-poorest-people-to-earn-125-a-day
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/op...reat-poverty-reductio-201481211590729809.html
Capitalism doesn't help end poverty, it feeds off of it, as you have admitted.
 
i'm not surprised you can't argue the point.

I've claimed lobbying is a problem, provided evidence of who lobbies, what they influence.. Say what you want.
 
it's all meaningless without proper solutions being offered.

You can wake up a person who is actually asleep, you can't wake someone who is pretending to be asleep.
 
I've claimed lobbying is a problem, provided evidence of who lobbies, what they influence.. Say what you want.

is your opposition to lobbying consistent?

I mean, do you really hate it when labor unions lobby for minimum wage increases?... be honest.
 
is your opposition to lobbying consistent?

I mean, do you really hate it when labor unions lobby for minimum wage increases?... be honest.

The entire lobbying system needs to go away, but if it exists, yes, I'm ok with that, if it's the only way to actually influence something.
 
not a fan of citizen participation in government eh?

Lobbying at this point mainly helps those with lots of money, I'm all for citizen participation.
 
Lobbying at this point mainly helps those with lots of money, I'm all for citizen participation.

Citizens do participate in all forms of lobbying, protests is a form of lobbying, million man marches are a form of lobbying. Activist groups are a form of lobbying. Green Peace is a lobbyist. There are lobbyist for and against government on about all issues. And there is big money on each side of any one issue. Take the Sacramento smelt where the lobbyist won the argument that the smelt trumped all the farmers need for water. Billions of gallons of water have been diverted away from the farmers for the smelt. Unions are lobbyist and they have deep pockets (lots of money) representing citizen participation.
 
Lobbying at this point mainly helps those with lots of money, I'm all for citizen participation.

opposing lobbying and supporting citizen participation are contradictory positions.

the opinion of lobbying mainly helping those with lots of money is extremely suspect....care to offer substantiation to that opinion?
 
opposing lobbying and supporting citizen participation are contradictory positions.

the opinion of lobbying mainly helping those with lots of money is extremely suspect....care to offer substantiation to that opinion?

The website I gave you, look at where the majority comes from.
 
Ok, 40 hours, at least, of labor a week by laborers in the third world, is worth 50 cents a week? You claim this hilarious bull****, you give me the evidence.
Another lame reply.
This is you not understanding what has been said.

Again;
You judge that by the local prevailing rate, just as you judge the conditions by the local requirements.

If it is only worth 0.50¢ a week, that is all it is worth.

What is it you do not understand about that?

Do you really not understand that?
Do I really need to change the amount for you to understand what is being said?


You admit that capitalists purposefully exploit workers?
More lameness. Figures.
You are wrong.
Paying them what they are worth is not exploitation.


You can't say it's not my business, I think it is.
And you are wrong because it is not your business.



Reduce their populations? What are you advocating here, genocide?
I am advocating you participating in their society to reduce their starvation by population reduction. That is the only thing that really works.
Feeding them with other's resources just exacerbates the problem.


So, if a child with parents who can't afford healthcare (Well, we have found ways to help that now..) is hurt, should they be denied care? After all, who cares?
:doh
Another emotive and lame reply.
You are not entitled to another's efforts. Not in reality or nature.
Get rid of that silly notion.


You refuse to give a reason for why they're lame, emotional appeal isn't emotional when it is the truth.
More irrational lameness and wrong to boot. Figures.


You are defining skilled labor on your own, very illogical and ignorant.
No, I am not.
Your reply is illogical as it is ignorant.


Hey, you're not backing up your assertions, the MLK/einstein point is obvious.
:naughty
That is what you are engaged in.
There is no obvious MLK point. You were being emotive as well as illogical.



Capitalism doesn't help end poverty, it feeds off of it, as you have admitted.
:doh
Wrong.





Even if they would, you would likely not accept it.
1. Wrong.
2. They can't show any such thing. The claim is "too much". That is a subjective assertion, and as such, can not be proven.


Every citizen has a right to lobby or have another lobby on their behalf. Sorry you do not like that, but there is nothing wrong with lobbying.

The wealthy support those who are of similar views as theirs own.
Just as the poor support those who are of similar views as theirs own.
If a person isn't a viable candidate for the masses they are appealing to, they are not going to be elected no matter how much money is thrown into the coffers by the wealthy.
 
Back
Top Bottom