• 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
MildSteel said:
That is too much power and something needs to be done about it.
Click to expand...

Yes. And who can we depend on to put the " Rich " in their place ?

The Government ? Because these simplistic, lazy and childish agenda's based on envy and a manufactured divisive narratives have done wonders when applied in other Countries.
 
Fenton said:
Yes. And who can we depend on to put the " Rich " in their place ?

The Government ? Because these simplistic, lazy and childish agenda's based on envy and a manufactured divisive narratives have done wonders when applied in other Countries.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that the wealthy should be allowed to do as they please?
 
Dovkan said:
Wait, you're telling me to keep a balance, we need to help the poor and make sure people have food, healthcare? Socialist. (Seriously though, this makes sense, I've never thought of it like this) But unfortunately, money is linked to power, corporations control the most watched media by the voters, money controls advertisements run.. I wouldn't call it balanced.
Click to expand...

Welfare is just mindless statism. People that worship the state are idiots.
 
Henrin said:
Yes, you get back to me when that works.
Click to expand...

Hey, tell that to those who were living under feudalism, It may not seem realistic to you, but that doesn't mean I can't support an idea that is highly plausible in the future.
 
MildSteel said:
That is true, but they also have control over the level of protection that those safety nets offer because they control the politicians that put such mechanisms into place in the first place. But I think what disturbs me most of all is the amount of influence that they have on the way people think. That is very disturbing.
Click to expand...

they do control the means to steer public opinion, but they steer it in both directions. the general public has the ability to say wait a minute, what? the general public's power is more latent, but my guess is that it is greater. unfortunately, "go team" screws up the signal to noise ratio when it comes to rational discussion. none of us are immune to that, which is also unfortunate.
 
Henrin said:
Welfare is just mindless statism. People that worship the state are idiots.
Click to expand...

How else do you propose these people get help? Welfare includes disability as well.. What, will the unregulated free market provide for them?
 
Dovkan said:
Hey, tell that to those who were living under feudalism, It may not seem realistic to you, but that doesn't mean I can't support an idea that is highly plausible in the future.
Click to expand...

A system that leads to totalitarianism is never going to be desirable.
 
Henrin said:
A system that leads to totalitarianism is never going to be desirable.
Click to expand...

A system that has never existed will somehow lead to totalitarianism based on your observations of something that has never existed, gotcha. I'm off to bed.
 
Dovkan said:
Not if everyone collectively works together, in a hypothetical communist society. where such a surplus exists that enough resources exist for everybody.
Click to expand...

What communist society has EVER had a surplus of anything other than suffering and police?
 
Dovkan said:
How else do you propose these people get help? Welfare includes disability as well.. What, will the unregulated free market provide for them?
Click to expand...

You would think socialists would look towards the community to help the poor, not the state, but hey, socialists are usually confused about their own ideology.
 
Dovkan said:
I threw out socialist as a joke, as that is what most people who don't have a sense of what a socialist is would call you, we've been taught to believe free healthcare and social programs are socialist, well, somewhat..
Click to expand...

i got the joke. i was pointing out that real socialism is actually something significantly to the left of the definition commonly embraced in the US.
 
Lutherf said:
What communist society has EVER had a surplus of anything other than suffering and police?
Click to expand...

A communist society would have no state, no money, and no social classes, show me one that has existed. You may be referring to socialist states run by dictators and psychopaths. The basic lack of understanding is astounding.
 
Helix said:
i got the joke. i was pointing out that real socialism is actually something significantly to the left of the definition commonly embraced in the US.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, absolutely.
 
Helix said:
they do control the means to steer public opinion, but they steer it in both directions. the general public has the ability to say wait a minute, what? the general public's power is more latent, but my guess is that it is greater. unfortunately, "go team" screws up the signal to noise ratio when it comes to rational discussion. none of us are immune to that, which is also unfortunate.
Click to expand...

They are not steering it in both directions. They make a hard right and then when they make a soft right it appears that they are going in the both directions. Clinton and Obama both have governed to the right of Nixon. Not only that but because they control the means to steer public opinion, they public doesn't say wait a minute until wealthy elites give the idea.
 
Henrin said:
You would think socialists would look towards the community to help the poor, not the state, but hey, socialists are usually confused about their own ideology.
Click to expand...

I could agree, if we could somehow get the entire country to help everyone through their communities, it just doesn't happen, which is why socialists look to the state.
 
Dovkan said:
A communist society would have no state, no money, and no social classes, show me one that has existed. You may be referring to socialist states run by dictators and psychopaths. The basic lack of understanding is astounding.
Click to expand...

You appear to be confused over your goals and actual results.
 
To Dovkan: So is the naiveté.
 
Dovkan said:
Not if everyone collectively works together, in a hypothetical communist society. where such a surplus exists that enough resources exist for everybody.
Click to expand...

and if I had wheels I'd be a trolley car.
 
Dovkan said:
I could agree, if we could somehow get the entire country to help everyone through their communities, it just doesn't happen, which is why socialists look to the state.
Click to expand...

Mutual aid societies were actually pretty successful and are far closer to socialist ideology than welfare. :shrug:
 
Henrin said:
You appear to be confused over your goals and actual results.
Click to expand...

Not at all, you seem to not understand the difference between a socialist state run by psychopaths and actual communism.
 
Henrin said:
Mutual aid societies were actually pretty successful and are far closer to socialist ideology than welfare. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Wait, a society where everyone helps each other? I thought human nature prevented this? :lamo Now tell me why communism isn't viable.
 
Dovkan said:
Not at all, you seem to not understand the difference between a socialist state run by psychopaths and actual communism.
Click to expand...

Socialism like modern liberalism usually needs psychopaths to do their dirty work.
 
Henrin said:
Socialism like modern liberalism usually needs psychopaths to do their dirty work.
Click to expand...

Just like the conservatives need psychopaths, this kind of discussion adds nothing to anything.
 
Dovkan said:
Just like the conservatives need psychopaths, this kind of discussion adds nothing to anything.
Click to expand...

Not really. Socialism involves a considerable amount of immoral acts that must be taken for the system to be put in place and function, which usually speaking people aren't so happy with doing themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom