• 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
thanks for confirming that, and i am sure your force also means killing people it need be...

I suppose, although I highly doubt it will come to that, in regards to using armed force.
 
We've seen what capitalists do without regulation, it's not hard. If anything, we'd revert back to feudalism.

The center of your complaint is large corporations that you believe fail to pay their workers fairly, while small businesses you find to be far more fair to their employees. What you're basically arguing against is the support network provided to business, not capitalism itself.
 
I suppose, although I highly doubt it will come to that, in regards to using armed force.

That is what it came to before. :shrug: Not only did your system lead to wide spread theft of property, but also the death of anyone that opposed your ideals.
 
The center of your complaint is large corporations that you believe fail to pay their workers fairly, while small businesses you find to be far more fair to their employees. What you're basically arguing against is the support network provided to business, not capitalism itself.

They don't pay them fairly. Wait, what the hell? Don't you know what a monopoly is? Capitalism itself is a broken system advocating the for profit utilization of production, seeking out the cheapest labor, regardless of the laborers condition, this is alleviated with regulation though, the inevitable wealth gap it creates..
 
I suppose, although I highly doubt it will come to that, in regards to using armed force.

oh, do you think that if anyone got in the way of you idea, you are not going to be for killing them?

i suppose?......NO you would, which is why you type of world will always fail, because worlds built of force do not last, they can created, but they always destroy themselves in the end.
 
That is what it came to before. :shrug: Not only did your system lead to wide spread theft of property, but also the death of anyone that opposed your ideals.

The system never existed, you're talking about marxist-leninist/maoist states where the property was taken by the state, the key ideology is no state, I vehemently disagree with what was done, although men Like Lenin truly had a fire in their hearts for the proletariats, and did make some phenomenal advances..
 
oh, do you think that if anyone got in the way of you idea, you are not going to be for killing them?

i suppose?......NO you would, which is why you type of world will always fail, because worlds built of force do not last, they can created, but they always destroy themselves in the end.

Sounds like what capitalists have done before, pointing out state socialism doesn't help you.
 
Sounds like what capitalists have done before.

what governments have done before......governments are the biggest violators of rights and killers of the people.

you advocate for a government which has total control of the people.......to violate and kill more.
 
what governments have done before......governments are the biggest violators of rights and killers of the people.

you advocate for a government which has total control of the people.......to violate and kill more.

You've never heard of capitalist dictators? Not a surprise. Also, do you want to abolish the state aswell? Wait, communism has no state, what government?
 
The system never existed, you're talking about marxist-leninist/maoist states where the property was taken by the state, the key ideology is no state, I vehemently disagree with what was done, although men Like Lenin truly had a fire in their hearts for the proletariats, and did make some phenomenal advances..

You see there is a reason communists call for the state to take action against property owners and that reason is because property owners are NOT going to just give up their property at the request of the communist.
 
You've never heard of capitalist dictators? Not a surprise. Also, do you want to abolish the state aswell? Wait, communism has no state, what government?

if communism has no state, then how are the people secure?

how does communism "enforce itself" if it has no state.
 
You see there is a reason communists call for the state to take action against property owners and that reason is because property owners are NOT going to just give up their property at the request of the communist.

socialism concentrates the parasitic nature of losers into an unwholesome force
 
They don't pay them fairly. Wait, what the hell? Don't you know what a monopoly is? Capitalism itself is a broken system advocating the for profit utilization of production, seeking out the cheapest labor, regardless of the laborers condition, this is alleviated with regulation though, the inevitable wealth gap it creates..

Monopolies are largely a creation of the state, so again, your argument is centered on the support network, not capitalism.
 
You see there is a reason communists call for the state to take action against property owners and that reason is because property owners are NOT going to just give up their property at the request of the communist.

Private property in regards to the means of production, which the owners obviously don't manage on their own or build on their own. I don't call for that, I think it follows like this, if done ideally over a long span of time: Democracy(Not a plutocracy, RIP my idea)-Democratic Socialism-Communism
We disagree fundamentally.
 
if communism has no state, then how are the people secure?

how does communism "enforce itself" if it has no state.

There is nothing to enforce, it is a stateless society with collective ownership of production, things like farms, factories, lakes.. You seem to like guns alot, as do I, have quite a few myself, people would be able to "enforce" the idea of not killing others, stealing other's PROPERTY, apart from the means of production.. Again, communism is when the workers, the people, live in a society without any state leadership.
 
There is nothing to enforce, it is a stateless society with collective ownership of production, things like farms, factories, lakes.. You seem to like guns alot, as do I, have quite a few myself, people would be able to "enforce" the idea of not killing others, stealing other's PROPERTY, apart from the means of production..

really....then as an individual suppose i wish to go off and do my own thing.... own my own land, farm it ,hunt, fish, and use the resources of it...can i?
 
socialism concentrates the parasitic nature of losers into an unwholesome force

Losers? Martin Luther King was a socialist, albert einstein, heck, socialism at it's core is giving the people who actually built the factories, the ****ing factories.
 
really....then as an individual suppose i wish to go off and do my own thing.... own my own land, farm it ,hunt, fish, and use the resources of it...can i?

If you wanted to, yes, farming would be accessible to all though, one wouldn't hoard food for themselves, unless their already is a massive surplus. You wouldn't have private ownership of land that can be used to benefit others, but you need to understand you would be able to hunt, fish..
 
There is nothing to enforce, it is a stateless society with collective ownership of production, things like farms, factories, lakes.. You seem to like guns alot, as do I, have quite a few myself, people would be able to "enforce" the idea of not killing others, stealing other's PROPERTY, apart from the means of production.. Again, communism is when the workers, the people, live in a society without any state leadership.

I can't help but notice you say "apart from the means of production". Communism is the strange the idea that people have the right to own a toothbrush, but not a business.
 
Losers? Martin Luther King was a socialist, albert einstein, heck, socialism at it's core is giving the people who actually built the factories, the ****ing factories.

Horsecrap

socialism is the plaint of failures or the greedy who wish to gain power by pandering to them
 
We've seen what capitalists do without regulation, it's not hard. If anything, we'd revert back to feudalism.

what do capitalist do without regulation?... and when have we ever seen a time of no regulation?

and really... durign this alleged time of no regulation.. .why did we not revert back to feudalism like you say we would?
 
not going to happen. and its funny watching you all whine about the power of the wealthy when you want to create an entity powerful enough to cap the wealth of the wealthy. In other words, your solution to something you see as evil is to create even worse evil

Its about achieving a reasonable balance of power.
 
Private property in regards to the means of production, which the owners obviously don't manage on their own or build on their own. I don't call for that, I think it follows like this, if done ideally over a long span of time: Democracy(Not a plutocracy, RIP my idea)-Democratic Socialism-Communism
We disagree fundamentally.

No, what you want is community owned property that individual people do not have the right to use as they see fit.
 
Back
Top Bottom