-->
@RationalMadman
Expand on what this means please.
It means that modern Left-Wing is primarily, if not entirely, predicated on making empty promises to poor people.
Left Wing want all have a chance to succeed. Right Wing prefer it only for a select few.
Posts
Total:
120
-->
@Theweakeredge
Let me be clear - how does the left-wing exploit poverty?
Read my responses to RationalMadMan.
GreyParrot, I have explained this already. The less productive the State is, the less it tends to have as high of an upper tier to compare its poverty to. The issue with America is cultural favouring of Right-Wing ethos combined with a lack of any Federal enforcement of things that can not be a State-level thing, such as welfare, affirmative action, benefits and more. US may eventually need to push the entire nation to unite or acceot it isn't working and break up into negihbouring, allied nations instead.
-->
@Athias
The reason they do come up empty is often due to the Right Wing filibustering them to hell and back via Senate loopholes in procedure and things along those lines.
-->
@Theweakeredge
Because it just seems to me that you have a bias
Seem is not an argument.
you know - talking about specific things applied to an entire political ideology, and ya know - not a general concept.
And to which political ideology did I ascribe exploiting poverty? Read RationalMadman's O.P., then read my response.
-->
@Athias
So your claim is that the programs that left-wing advocate for, don't actually help the poor, they come back to the rich? Wait -this is literally just a spiel about not liking taxes, but... you know - if people have enough money to afford stuff like healthcare, rent, and food - then they can get a job and actually afford their taxes... ya know - unlike whenever you can't get out of poverty.
This really just seems like you not liking taxes - we call it a social contract.
The less productive the State is, the less it tends to have as high of an upper-tier to compare its poverty to.
Then you don't have the foggiest clue how the GINI coefficient is calculated. It compares the difference between the wealthy and the poor in a state. A state doesn't have to be productive to get a high GINI inequality score, for example: Louisiana is closely ranked with New York simply because there have been decades of left-wing corruption especially in New Orleans with the aftermath of Katrina where pay-to-play corruption is as rampant as both New York AND California, despite Louisiana being a very low productive State overall.
-->
@RationalMadman
It's not a trick. When it's absent you get the tier of poverty that nations like Ethiopia see.
No, one wouldn't. A poor person without assistance in the U.S. would still be "better off" than a poor person with assistance in Ethiopia.
-->
@Athias
Actually -we call it being intellectually honest - I do not KNOW that you have a bias, it is merely being suggested by the information presented- it actually is an argument, just one your afraid of using - you know - admitting when your not quite sure. Of course, you could not be afraid at all - but then it just seems like you can't help but get caught up In semantics.
-->
@Athias
No, they wouldn't.
-->
@Athias
Now - I agree that social mobility is not at all what the American Dream purports it to be, but that certainly isn't because of programs WHICH RAISE SOCIAL MOBILITY - no - its the insistence that capitalism will solve all your problems, the harder we go pure capitalism, the harder our mobility will fall - especially whenever we see the end result of capitalism, monopolization.
-->
@RationalMadman
Exhibit A:
The reason they do come up empty is often due to the Right Wing filibustering them to hell and back via Senate loopholes in procedure and things along those lines
Not to mention the incentives behind these empty promises: they can blame the right wing as the reasons these programs aren't successful all while depending on their poverty to solicit their votes.
-->
@Athias
You didn't tell me why I'm wrong.
-->
@RationalMadman
Dems did everything towards assisting the Civil Rights movement.
Everything? Really? Check the resulting House/Senate vote on the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
It passed the House 290 - 130
By Party, the following voted for the bill:
D - 61% voted yea
R - 80% voted yea
It passed the Senate 73 - 27
By Party, the following voted for the bill:
D - 69% voted yea
R - 82% voted yea
Therefore, in both houses, a greater percentage of Rs voted for the bill than Ds, and clearly indicates that, even in a [then] D-majority in the South, they could not defeat the bill.
-->
@Athias
The Left Wing programs don't go wrong when passed untik the Right Wing plot to sabotage it. That's a fact, not a theory. This is precisely what occurred with Medicaid that devolved into Obamacare.
-->
@RationalMadman
Senate loopholes
Loopholes that the Ds have made far more hay, and imposed far more often by count than by Rs.
-->
@fauxlaw
I am not only talking about the acts, I am talking about the enforcement of them. They existed but were barely enforced and cops were abusing blacks far worse back then than now. That's all changed bit by bit almost 100% due to Demcorats and the Left Wing. GOP helped slavery end and voted in favour of certain acts when they saw no way out.
Idk why you are even trying to pretend that Reoublicans are the less racist party. It's actually becoming ridiculous to read the shit you're posting and the reach you're going to to find outlandish cases to justify it.
Why are you dodging the core topic or main things I'm saying and cherry picking things to find some weird technicalities to deny with?
Literally everyone knows Republicans ar ethe more racist party in this day and age, every racist knows that.
-->
@fauxlaw
Loopholes that the Ds have made far more hay, and imposed far more often by count than by Rs.
Baseless lie.
-->
@RationalMadman
The Left Wing programs don't go wrong
Including the 1994 Crime Bill [even dubbed "Biden's Crime Bill"]; Joe Biden's one legislative claim to fame, which even Ds now admit was an abject failure they run from. Like they should have run from Hidin' Biden last year.
You seem married to "all-or-nothing." Pls advise where to send flowers.
-->
@RationalMadman
Baseless lie.
It's in the Congressional Record, my friend. Going to say that's a lie?
Want more sympathy flowers?
-->
@fauxlaw
Nothing you say is even relevant. Literally nothing. Even if it were true that your lie of Dems sabotaging Republican policies via loopholes is done moreire often, what I said to Athias would still be true.
-->
@fauxlaw
Shitpost all you want and say send flowers if it makes you feel good but don't @ me with this shit.
I forget why I unblocked you but it's not getting undone again.
>>> RationalMadmanthat's the only reason Lincoln sided with the North.
Not significant reader of Lincoln, are you? That side-with lie is why both Oba'a and Biden wrap themselves in Lincoln, But it ain't really Lincoln's cloak they wrap, and it ain't his baseline thinking. I see "KKK" on the inside label of the cloak those two wrap.
What, can't decide whether to block me or not? Hair trigger, yeah? Make a sticking choice.
I've made a sticking choice alright. You are a nasty fucking piece of work.
Ref post #83
Is only just apparent that when an argument devolves to personal attack, and that is the argument of last resort, some on both sides will shut out further argument?
Shall I add the composer of #83 to the list of people on the Left who do not want success for everybody, in spite of the all-or-nothing claim of the topic proposal? Seems he put himself on the list. So be it. He had to ask. At least its in good company.
If anyone with any input worth reading will like to post please @ me, I'll leave this thread unopened otherwise.
-->
@Theweakeredge
So your claim is that the programs that left-wing advocate for, don't actually help the poor, they come back to the rich?
No, read my statements again.
Wait -this is literally just a spiel about not liking taxes, but...
I've provided no "spiel," much less anything about not liking taxes.
if people have enough money to afford stuff like healthcare, rent, and food - then they can get a job and actually afford their taxes... ya know - unlike whenever you can't get out of poverty.
Point out where I said this.
This really just seems like you not liking taxes - we call it a social contract.
Seem is not an argument; seem is your impression. And no taxes are not a "social contract" but that's a discussion for another thread.
Actually -we call it being intellectually honest
You can call it whatever you want. Seem is not an argument.
I do not KNOW that you have a bias, it is merely being suggested by the information presented
Not by the information present, but by your impression.
it actually is an argument, just one your afraid of using
Now, I'm "afraid"? This is not argumentation. It's just a poor attempt to "intellectualize" your feelings.
Of course, you could not be afraid at all - but then it just seems like you can't help but get caught up In semantics.
I've been stating that "seem is not an argument" since before I joined this site. If you believe it's merely "semantic," then I'll let you deal with that.
-->
@Athias
Then pray tell - what is the obligation that the poor get from receiving benefits? Because the only thing that occurs to me is taxes. There is no obligation.
Also... yes - taxes are a form of a social contract
-->
@Theweakeredge
Now - I agree that social mobility is not at all what the American Dream purports it to be, but that certainly isn't because of programs WHICH RAISE SOCIAL MOBILITY
Whether you agree is of no consequence. Furthermore, I did not mention "social mobility." The mobility of which I spoke is Economic.
no - its the insistence that capitalism will solve all your problems, the harder we go pure capitalism, the harder our mobility will fall - especially whenever we see the end result of capitalism, monopolization.
Who insists that Capitalism will "solve all your problems"? And no, the end result of Capitalism is not "monopolization," though that is an argument for another thread.