• 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!

The divide between the rich and the rest

How serious a problem is the divide between the wealthy and the rest of us?

  • This divide does not exist.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    109
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

Your statement sounded like the administrative functions of a business were at the level of the floor sweeper, it was something anybody could do. I completely disagree.

It takes a lot of knowledge, either gained via a degree and then a whole lot of on the job experience, or a whole lot of years just on the job, to administratively run a viable business. Be it large, medium, small company or sole prop.
 
There are an innumerable jobs in this world and nearly all of them are held by someone of average intelligence.

Saying that these people are incapable of finding work outside of unskilled labor is completely liberal bull****.

As I asked before:



It's very difficult to find work when you're unqualified for anything and unwilling to become qualified.

There are NOT innumerable jobs.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

And you ignore the simple fact that not everybody CAN do what jobs there are, no matter how hard they might try.

Everybody can't do everything.

And just because what they CAN do isn't considered profitable enough doesn't mean they should jus7 starve to death.
 
Your statement sounded like the administrative functions of a business were at the level of the floor sweeper, it was something anybody could do. I completely disagree.

It takes a lot of knowledge, either gained via a degree and then a whole lot of on the job experience, or a whole lot of years just on the job, to administratively run a viable business. Be it large, medium, small company or sole prop.

I think he was talking about data entry jobs, not administrative.staff.
 
People are accosted for gardening? Wow - where do you live 'cause I don't want to ever go there, not even to visit.

Try growing Cannabis sativa in your garden and see how long it is before you are assaulted by agents of the State.
 
There are NOT innumerable jobs.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

And you ignore the simple fact that not everybody CAN do what jobs there are, no matter how hard they might try.

Everybody can't do everything.

And just because what they CAN do isn't considered profitable enough doesn't mean they should jus7 starve to death.

Innumerable means exactly what I know it means, which I guess means you have no idea what it means.

What I don't know is what "everybody can't do everything" means. I know I certainly never said anything of the sort although I'm getting the distinct impression that you can't do anything.

Out of curiosity, do you have a career of any kind?
 
Last edited:
Innumerable means exactly what I know it means, which I guess means you have no idea what it means.

What I don't know is what "everybody can't do everything" means. I know I certainly never said anything of the sort although I'm getting the distinct impression that you can't do anything.

Out of curiosity, do you have a career of any kind?

Innumeral means "without number".

Infinite.

Not accurate.

Don't do careers.

Bet I know how to do FAR more things than you do.

Specialization is for insects.
 
Of course, "governments" in modern democracies operate in the same way as they did in the 17th century, during the English civil war.

When it comes to the most basic of transactions, yes, they do. The government utilizes the coercive power of threatened force to ensure compliance, and maintains sovereignty over its' exercise.

But if you don't believe me, please inform your government that you no longer intend to comply with their laws, and then proceed to cease doing so. You may be astonished at the results, as they will not include attempts to pretty-please you or convince you of the efficacy of following the rules; they will instead include physical force or the threat therein (depending on how far you decide to go before you comply).

Government doesn't enforce law with this:

d12PHIL-1009x1023.jpg



It enforces law with this:

SWAT%20team%20pic%20for%20blog.jpeg





When you pass laws controlling people's actions, you are using violence to ensure that they obey your preferences. That you personally prefer to have others engage in that violence on your behalf does not excuse you from that act.
 
Last edited:
I expect my post to be overlooked because facts and truth often are

Our economic woes on a global scale are not actually that complicated. They have a very simple root. It's the debt system.

In ancient times, nations forgave foreign and domestic debt with regularity when it became too large for a healthy society to function. Babylonia and Sumeria are common examples.

Rome was the first nation in history to force people to repay their debts in perpetuity, with interest. If a foreign country couldn't pay back its debt, then it was likely to be invaded by Rome so that its physical capital could be used as repayment.

We have the same problem happening on an international scale right now. The top 10% of wealth owners are making us beholden to our debts, via the World Bank and the IMF. Those who can't pay back their debts or even the interest on their debts (usually equivalent to their entire GDP) are offered the chance to pay back debts using their country's resource capital. This effectively enslaves entire nations while systematically destroying any hope of them having future prosperity once their material resources are drained.

There are places like Brazil where the Amazon - the lungs of our planet - are being clear cut and burned because in exchange for some debt forgiveness, the industry elites in the Brazilian government allowed foreign multinationals to setup logging companies there. As the public economy dries up and jobs become scarce, Northern Brazilians turn to the lumber industry for work, and they are now dependent on the multinationals for employment. Thus, even if we try to stop the destruction of the Amazon, we will face social pressure from the poor people themselves who are now dependence on the debt-based system to survive.

The answer to our economic problems is debt forgiveness. We really have no choice at this point. The environment is not an "externality", it's a finite resource and the top 10% are stripping entire nations bare as a demand for debt repayment. When one nation goes dry, they move to the next, despite the fact that the debt was never actually repayed. This is because the nations were enslaved on the interest alone.

Once a nation is depleted, all it has is human capital, and those humans become beholden to industry, or they become migrant populations that congregate in big cities where the only work available is service jobs for the same crappy corporations. They usually don't get paid living wages because those same Structural Adjustment Programs ensured that worker rights were reduced for the sake of "productivity". In other words, the globalists have reinvented slavery. If people get paid anything at all, it's not slavery according to the UN. But in reality, it pretty much is.

We have places like the Congo which are reduced to mining colonies because IMF Structural Adjustment Programs won't allow them to invest money into projects that raise living standards, but instead force them to do projects that maximize profit which is then taken by the globalists.

There are really only 2 solutions at this point:
1) Refuse to pay back the debt.
2) Demand that the debts be forgiven.

The time crunch has to do with environmental factors, and the psychopaths who are stripping the planet bare while making people beholden to their debts are going to ruin us. If the debt were eliminated, we could invest money into the general welfare of humanity and get out of this capitalist nightmare. Unlike the 1930's depression, the IMF and World Bank SAPS leave the land bare, so that once the means of production are cut off from a population due to its inability to pay, people start dying. They can't turn to their own lands anymore for help because it's either been harvested or polluted from trying to pay everything back.

Iceland has forgiven its own debt and given the finger to the globalist system. Many countries should start doing the same. There is no excuse for wealthy globalists to sequester all the necessities of human life, while severely degrading living standards. They are psychopathic addicts, plain and simple. They don't care if you are right or left wing, they don't care if you live in the land of the "free" or in communism; they don't care what happens to anyone on this planet as long as they get their money, even if it means the planet's ecology itself collapsing and millions of people dying.

In this debate, people are focusing too much on micro-wealth. People who own $1 million or even $100 million at not the problem. I'm talking about the elites who FOUNDED this financial system and continue to parasitically benefit from it.

The United States and most western nations can still pay their interest, so we aren't experiencing the horrors that most of the world is. But we won't be able to pay our interest forever. Our interest rate is quickly approaching our total GDP. Once it exceeds that, we will be in default, and then the elites will start making their sociopathic demands that will destroy us completely.
 
There are an innumerable jobs in this world and nearly all of them are held by someone of average intelligence.

Saying that these people are incapable of finding work outside of unskilled labor is completely liberal bull****.

As I asked before:

It's very difficult to find work when you're unqualified for anything and unwilling to become qualified.
As I said before, even if we all had degrees or were skilled there would still be a need for janitors and file clerks.
 
Your statement sounded like the administrative functions of a business were at the level of the floor sweeper, it was something anybody could do. I completely disagree.

It takes a lot of knowledge, either gained via a degree and then a whole lot of on the job experience, or a whole lot of years just on the job, to administratively run a viable business. Be it large, medium, small company or sole prop.
I don't count file clerk or data entry as any kind of skilled or educated labor. I've been all three, including a janitor a very long time ago. The only difference is that today it probably does require typing above 20 WPM (@1 error, or 15 WPM @0), which is all I needed years and years ago. When I recently did 10-key entry on a temp job I did had to qualify fairly high, so I'll give you that one. File clerks at the lowest level need almost no experience or education to speak of. Where those paths lead is a different story. Being a rodman requires nothing but good health and an outdoorsy attitude. Becoming a PLS (land surveyor) takes education, a few years of experience, a head for numbers, and preferably 3-D vision.


BTW - Your sig is from Blue on Black?
 
Last edited:
Try growing Cannabis sativa in your garden and see how long it is before you are assaulted by agents of the State.
I wouldn't call it assault but, yes, I'm sure in most states they would arrest you for it. I think Republicans are more responsible for that one, though, and a few others you're not giving them credit for.
 
I don't count file clerk or data entry as any kind of skilled or educated labor. I've been all three, including a janitor a very long time ago. The only difference is that today it probably does require typing above 20 WPM (@1 error, or 15 WPM @0), which is all I needed years and years ago. When I recently did 10-key entry on a temp job I did had to qualify fairly high, so I'll give you that one. File clerks at the lowest level need almost no experience or education to speak of. Where those paths lead is a different story. Being a rodman requires nothing but good health and an outdoorsy attitude. Becoming a PLS (land surveyor) takes education, a few years of experience, a head for numbers, and preferably 3-D visio

BTW - Your sig is from Blue on Black?
i'm thinking a notch up - office manager, full charge bookkeeper now require at least a BA in business admin or a boatload of experience. A good one usually actually runs thebusiness while the boss gets the credit.

Yes, blue on black - a favotite of mine, you enjoy KWS?
 
I wouldn't call it assault but, yes, I'm sure in most states they would arrest you for it. I think Republicans are more responsible for that one, though, and a few others you're not giving them credit for.

Which returns us to the point that libertarians oppose the initiation of violence against person and property. So a libertarian would agree with you that those who kill, maim, or steal from others should be stopped and/or punished.

However, libertarians (unlike other political philosophies) hold agents of the state to the same standard. Thus, if an agent of the state were to accost a person for growing a plant, a libertarian would regard that as common assault. Essentially, there is one standard of human behavior, not one for the mundanes and then another for agents of the State.
 
i'm thinking a notch up - office manager, full charge bookkeeper now require at least a BA in business admin or a boatload of experience. A good one usually actually runs thebusiness while the boss gets the credit.

Yes, blue on black - a favotite of mine, you enjoy KWS?
Many professions are that way. As I've shown, my own is, as well. PLS is a minimum of an associates with two years in only land surveying (which generally translates into 4 years on the job because half isn't land surveying) or a BS with a year experience in land surveying (2 years in the field) - and that's just to apply to take the test. I would still call a rodman (entry level surveying) a "simple" job - I taught my 12 y/o how to do the "technical" part, what there is of it, in less than an hour. But as I noted earlier, even if the whole office is full of PLS's, someone still has to hold the rod and someone else needs to run the instruments - and that's just the main field work, not the real job of land surveying.


He reminds me a lot of Stevie Ray Vaughn, who I found out later was one of KWS's "role models" for want of a better word.
 
Last edited:
Which returns us to the point that libertarians oppose the initiation of violence against person and property. So a libertarian would agree with you that those who kill, maim, or steal from others should be stopped and/or punished.

However, libertarians (unlike other political philosophies) hold agents of the state to the same standard. Thus, if an agent of the state were to accost a person for growing a plant, a libertarian would regard that as common assault. Essentially, there is one standard of human behavior, not one for the mundanes and then another for agents of the State.
And taxes???
 
Not sure to whom you're referring, but I believe you have a mistaken notion of libertarianism. They are the ONLY political philosophy that, across the board, opposes the initiation of interpersonal aggression. So, in fact, they are the exact opposite of your characterization.

I know what libertarianism is, I am just commenting on how its self identifying adherents represent themselves on forums such as this :)
 
I expect my post to be overlooked because facts and truth often are

No, your post is going to be largely overlooked because following its prescriptions would be insanely destructive.


There are really only 2 solutions at this point:
1) Refuse to pay back the debt.
2) Demand that the debts be forgiven.

This, for example. Do you know what happens if the US loses the ability to borrow?
 
I wouldn't call it assault but, yes, I'm sure in most states they would arrest you for it. I think Republicans are more responsible for that one, though, and a few others you're not giving them credit for.

in my nanny state country, growing 1 - 2 plants for personal use is decriminalized in some states, and attracts a fine, but no conviction. Growers are required to attend an education program however, so that they are aware of the risks associated with cannabis use.

seems the heavy handed republicans in the US have contributed to quite a different environment, which I guess is one of the main reasons why the US has the highest incarceration rate globally.
 
Last edited:
Which returns us to the point that libertarians oppose the initiation of violence against person and property. So a libertarian would agree with you that those who kill, maim, or steal from others should be stopped and/or punished.

However, libertarians (unlike other political philosophies) hold agents of the state to the same standard. Thus, if an agent of the state were to accost a person for growing a plant, a libertarian would regard that as common assault. Essentially, there is one standard of human behavior, not one for the mundanes and then another for agents of the State.

well I am not a libertarian, but I have been an active opponent of police brutality. The police officer's role is to uphold the law, not to break it.
 
This, for example. Do you know what happens if the US loses the ability to borrow?

Yes, it would have to start living within its means and conserving. The idea of constant "progress" and productive expansion would have to be tossed out in favor of more manageable resources; which is something the whole human species has to do anyway if we want to have a hope of getting out of the current era in one piece.

The debt system is destroying this planet. Forget the economy for a second. The economy is a human invention, it ultimately does not matter. I'm talking about the real, physical, quantifiable annual bounty of this planet.

We lived within this planet's renewable means until 1980, when we started over-withdrawing the resources, just like you if took out a line of credit. Except with the earth there is no bankruptcy option or do-over. If we permanently destroy our source of life, there is no other planet for us to go to. We can't restart the credit system. We just go extinct or at least suffer a drastic fallback to a previous standard of living from hundreds of years ago.
 
When it comes to the most basic of transactions, yes, they do. The government utilizes the coercive power of threatened force to ensure compliance, and maintains sovereignty over its' exercise.

But if you don't believe me, please inform your government that you no longer intend to comply with their laws, and then proceed to cease doing so. You may be astonished at the results, as they will not include attempts to pretty-please you or convince you of the efficacy of following the rules; they will instead include physical force or the threat therein (depending on how far you decide to go before you comply).

....

It enforces law with this:

SWAT%20team%20pic%20for%20blog.jpeg





When you pass laws controlling people's actions, you are using violence to ensure that they obey your preferences. That you personally prefer to have others engage in that violence on your behalf does not excuse you from that act.

I don't think you get it.

Hobbes was writing in quite a different context from today, however you have his ideas about the state completely out of context anyway.

you should read up on hobbes, and you should read up on the period he was writing in.

I don't condone the use of violence, although I recognize that there may be some extreme cases which pose a serious threat which the government has to have the power to protect its citizens from. but these are relatively rare.

although no doubt more common in the US.

quite possibly, the fact that in the US individuals who subscribe to extremist anti government conspiracy propaganda have access to arsenals of military style weapons makes it more likely that your government needs to have access to the use of force.
 
Back
Top Bottom