five reasons it's stupid to vote for trump

back to the straw man arguments I see. I have literally never said that government should have full control. That doesn't seem to stop you from lying about it though. 

So people who do massive damage sometimes give tiny fractions of their wealth back? In most cases it is just a publicity stunt to get people to look over their massive abuses the rest of the time. 

you clearly don't understand what capitolism is. Very few companies are ever "for the consumer". Almost none that listed on a public stock exchange. They are for their own bottom lines. Sometimes that causes them to do nice things. Sometimes they want to buy some good publicity so people think how nice they are, then they go back to royally screwing them over. 

back to the straw man arguments I see. I have literally never said that government should have full control. That doesn't seem to stop you from lying about it though. 

Communism is everything controlled by government. No private businesses. That isn't a straw man when it did happen. It's factual. Not straw man

And how much have you donated to Covid 19 reliefs? Certainly less than $8B. Maybe work harder and invent something useful instead of complaining about society? Why don't you donate all your funds to the government so people can be healthy

Also it's not a small portion of their wealth. The net worth is in the company. There bank account is less worth than their net worth. He gave up a huge some. And are you the people donating? How do you know it's all for show. You simply don't

Yes they are. Ofc they want to make money, but they fill a need for the people. And if you don't need the product then don't buy from the companies. They try to help the consumer in their life

ok, you praise them for doing stuff, then immediately acknowledge it is a scheme to help them make money and is not actually intended to be for the public good. You can't even keep your own arguments straight.

 You get the innovation and growth of capitalism, while you have a strong government to keep their evil, greed based decisions kept in check. 

But i don't want that.

I do. And I agree it isn't true, yet. That is the point. Rich assholes want people to believe that poor people deserve to get sick and die while the people who profit off those poor people buy their 3rd yacht or 4th mansion. 

this doesn't even make sense on the face of it. But as medical technology improves we likely will develop artificial organs and this will become the case. 

You acknowledge they do that anyway, so it makes absolutely no difference whether or not healthcare is a right. Thank you for disproving your own point. 

You seem to be missing the point. alot of those diseases are treatable early. 

The point is, Buff, those yachts are paid for by their money, not yours, not mine. My money isn't yours, either. Make your bloody own.

So, what of right now. You want the right right now. Can't have right now under my proposed condition, can you? Get it?

You've entirely missed my point. My acknowledgment is not contrary to the point, being, specifically, that MTV Jackass stunt is on him, not on me. Let him pay for his idiocy.

My point was, with control of what goes in the pie hole, which is entirely a personal decision, not anyone else's, 80% and 60% of those diseases don't need early treatment because they would not be contracted in the first place. 

 It's called preventive medicine, Bucko, and that is entirely free with no imposition on anyone else's pocketbook, period. Get it?

most of them didn't really make that money either. They squeezed it out of the labor of others. 

most of them didn't really make that money either. They squeezed it out of the labor of others. 

Both parties agreed to the terms of work. If people felt they were being squeezed of money they could quit.

It's okay because socialism will stop you from greedily selling your labor to capitalists and stop you from greedily purchasing the goods you desire by making it illegal to do so.

It's far easier for the government to control you than people who have capital.

The government will choose for you who you can and cannot sell your labor to.

That is your idea of a "benevolent" government.

In order for Socialism to actually work, the government doesn't need to go after capitalists. 

They squeezed it out of the labor of others. 

every modern country on the planet (except the US) has some version of universal healthcare. 

Point to a tiny percentage of healthcare costs,

Are you delusional?

preventative medicine is giving people medicine to stop deseases getting worse. 

That is the most lame, socialist argument there is.

And that makes the world right, and we're wrong?

 the total cost of the three chronic diseases I named, heart disease, cancer, and diabetes, those three, alone account for 60.2% of the total of $3.7T chronic diseases cost us in the U.S. In what universe is 60%^ a "tiny percentage?" Not in my republic. Sorry about yours.

Yeah. To a socialist putz. 

Preventive medicine is not needing medicine in the first place because you take care of your body by correct eating habits, exercise, and maintaining a prudent lifestyle. 

I have absolutely no control over corporations. 

of course they could. Then they can choose to work at one of the corporations that doesn't prioritize money over people, if such a company existed. Sadly, capitalism doesn't work that way. 

Saying people can do things that hypothetically could happen, but in reality cannot happen, is a silly argument. 

Stop buying their crap. Make it yourself or buy it from someone who you believe gives a fuck about you. 

Why do you insist on giving up your right to choose what to purchase with your own money to establish a benevolent government to make those choices for you?

Do you have any idea what you’re saying? You claim to not be a socialist but are actively advocating total government control over a business.

In your world no good company exists because they want money. With your logic there won’t be any companies. 

As I mentioned earlier wanting money and taking care of workers are not mutually exclusive. 

You saying otherwise shows your ignorance or a socialist desire which we know is harmful.

please point out where i said government should have total control over business. I doubt you will be able to, because i have never said that. 

this is, more or less, an accurate description of the real world that we currently live in.

not entirely, but largely it is. Every extra dollar you give your employee is one extra dollar you can't funnel into your own pocket, or those of your investors.

you clearly have no idea what socialism is. You seem to think that if it isn't completely unregulated capitolism, then it must be socialism. The world is a much more complicated place than you seem to be capable of understanding.

this is, more or less, an accurate description of the real world that we currently live in. 

In HB's fantasy world. Slaves simply provide what he desires with no transaction because they are evil for having capital and producing something he must use his money to purchase.

NO ONE IS ADVOCATING SOCIALISM 

They provide healthcare to their entire population.

" MTV Jackass stunt"

Straw man's

You might have enough disposable income to eat lots of balanced meals

back to the straw man arguments I see. I have literally never said that government should have full control. That doesn't seem to stop you from lying about it though. 

Communism is everything controlled by government. No private businesses. That isn't a straw man when it did happen. It's factual. Not straw man

True, but since literally no one is advocating for communism, it is a complete straw man argument here. 

And how much have you donated to Covid 19 reliefs? Certainly less than $8B. Maybe work harder and invent something useful instead of complaining about society? Why don't you donate all your funds to the government so people can be healthy

very nice deflection. But utterly worthless in this conversation. 

Also it's not a small portion of their wealth. The net worth is in the company. There bank account is less worth than their net worth. He gave up a huge some. And are you the people donating? How do you know it's all for show. You simply don't

As far as I can tell you are picking numbers out of the air with absolutely no context, then praising people who you don't actually name. Do you honestly think you are making any valid points? I assure you, you are not. 

Yes they are. Ofc they want to make money, but they fill a need for the people. And if you don't need the product then don't buy from the companies. They try to help the consumer in their life

ok, you praise them for doing stuff, then immediately acknowledge it is a scheme to help them make money and is not actually intended to be for the public good. You can't even keep your own arguments straight. 

The thing is you can't find any monopolies in America.

Government is naturally evil and did dirty tricks to get in the business. The majority of company owners worked hard to get where they are. 

Not a reflection, but a genuine question. You donated less. Your maybe $5 you donated are minuscule compared to his $8B

You don't know how basic economy works then if you think Mark Zuckerberg net worth is his total.  Your net worth is all your companies revenue plus your total revenue. His bank account is much smaller than his net worth. Basic economy, but I guess you wouldn't know since your arguing for socialism

There is a need in society. The companies fills the need by providing an item. They set a price for it. If you need it/want it, you buy it. If you don't, then don't buy it. Business aren't tricking you.

If you give government the full control, destroying business, the government will screw over the people the same as the monopoly. The thing is you can't find any monopolies in America

Someone needs a primer on what socialist ideals are. You're distributing them whether you know it 

You entirely missed my point that their population is 10M. Ours is 327M. We're the third largest population in the world.

195 countries in the world. 32 is but 16% of them.

ou get hung-up on a cvtch phrase and blow the rest of the interpretation. Can't skim read and expect to capture meaning, but this is what you do. Stop it.

There are options for fresh food: like frozen

Get smart.

So you think americans are too incompetent to manage their own healthcare?

Corporations act for their own best interests only. They don't care at all about the people. There is absolutely no way to remove them if they act against the public interest. Corporations are by far the bigger threat to the people. 

So you think americans are too incompetent to manage their own healthcare

YAY!! but the US lags behind most of the free world. 

 frozen food, by definition is not fresh.

ok, so your argument is that people who don't have the money to invest in advanced methods of food preparation and storage, or the space available to grow their own food deserve to die. 

To the contrary. We think the govt is too incompetent to manage our healthcare.

So let me get this straight. You’re advocating for the abolition of corporations? Or you want to control how a corporation spends its money. Where it spends it’s money and where they get their investment from? All from the govt of course.