U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-23-2011, 10:38 AM
 
3,614 posts, read 3,451,320 times
Reputation: 911

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Then prove your GD assertion and quit playing stupid.



You make broad generalizations and want me to provide the data for everyone to see in hopes that it proves your point. You're the one that made this "specialized."

Now prove your idiotic assertion or stand down.
I just want you to prove your point. I'm merely pointing out that your evidence--isn't. You can't compare a 400,000 a year president to the minimum wage 10,000 a year of a McDonald's cashier. Do you think that is a fair comparison to make?

If you do, then the private sector clearly makes more money, because Bill Gates drew a pay of some 1,000,000 annual, while I pulled in a measly 20,000.

I don't need to prove my point because I'm not asserting one. You are, and your evidence doesn't actually support your position, because it isn't an accurate measurement of private compensation and public compensation.

You lost your argument when you failed to back it up with relevant information. Shame, because I think you'd be surprised by what you find.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-23-2011, 10:48 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,374,655 times
Reputation: 12325
Quote:
Originally Posted by nep321 View Post
With all this Occupy Wall Street protesting going on, it seems that these people are advocating a more socialist government. But, has socialism ever worked over the long term, to the point that it would be better than capitalist U.S. policy?
From what I see, OWS protestors would be fine with policies we saw in 1940-1980 USA. Was that socialism? Was that capitalism? Were those terrible times?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2011, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Milwaukee
1,036 posts, read 1,956,738 times
Reputation: 1814
IMO we have a mixed system of Capitalism/Socialism. All system are programed to fail at some point. No system lasts forever. Democracy for example will eventually fail due to the inherent flaw that once the populace figures out that they can vote in politicians which will continue to promise benefits. At some point the politicians will not be able to deliver and collapse will occur. Sound familiar? Also, absolute Capitalism will fail at the point it becomes corrupt due to to much power and wealth concentrated in a few hands. Greed and power will take hold and eventually the masses will revolt. Absolute Socialism or we will call it Communism will also collapse due to ,again, the concentration of power by a few.

All economic/political systems are moving targets that are bound to fail. It is a cycle that repeats itself over and over and over. It is the nature of the system.

Last edited by Allan Trafton; 12-23-2011 at 12:54 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 01:37 PM
 
2 posts, read 1,676 times
Reputation: 10
I think we are all speculators who believe whatever benefits us as individuals. The reality is that we are all inherently selfish and always have been. That is why so many socialist/communist nations have failed in the past. Socialism is inherently selfish and insecure, for the most part, and that is why it has been so commonly and continually attempted in our worlds history. For some odd reason there was a movement to break away from the common destruction of socialism in the late 1700s. These men (Founding Fathers) created the greatest nation this world has ever seen by completely curbing their inherently selfish ways. All I know is that they are humans that are fascinatingly more intelligent than any modern people. (relatively speaking).

In conclusion:

I do not necessarily believe in one ideology or another because I know that I am primitive in my thinking, but what I do know is that these men came up with the best possible approach to government that our world has ever seen. Based on history,our best chance to save this country is to bank on what works. (Don't bite the hand that has fed each and every one of us unless we have PROOF that something else works better.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Gone
25,230 posts, read 16,625,083 times
Reputation: 5927
Once again Germany is doing pretty good, in fact they are doing better than us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 02:53 PM
 
2 posts, read 1,676 times
Reputation: 10
They are currently... Is that thanks to them or us?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Gone
25,230 posts, read 16,625,083 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy95 View Post
They are currently... Is that thanks to them or us?
Them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Hinckley Ohio
6,721 posts, read 5,115,804 times
Reputation: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas View Post
Once again Germany is doing pretty good, in fact they are doing better than us.
Germany

Sweden

Norway

All doing better that us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2013, 04:33 AM
 
1 posts, read 751 times
Reputation: 10
Default US Government is broken

You can call "our" government anything you want to but the bottom line is that it is broken. If "our" representatives, senators and president can't work together to do "our" countries business for the good of the people who put them in office then "we" ought to have the good sense to vote someone else into office. I don't think our current system will ever be able to do that anymore. The federal government is far too big and cumbersome to be efficient. We have expected the government to do too much for us that we should have done ourselves. Its time for a big change. 1st I would change congressional terms to no more than 2 terms for senators and 3 for congressmen. No full pay retirement or benefits for life. Also, a period of service in the military, peace corps or maybe a couple of other organizations should be a requirement. Who better to take care of our country than someone who has defended it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2013, 04:42 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,674,279 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammer663 View Post
You can call "our" government anything you want to but the bottom line is that it is broken. If "our" representatives, senators and president can't work together to do "our" countries business for the good of the people who put them in office then "we" ought to have the good sense to vote someone else into office. I don't think our current system will ever be able to do that anymore. The federal government is far too big and cumbersome to be efficient. We have expected the government to do too much for us that we should have done ourselves. Its time for a big change. 1st I would change congressional terms to no more than 2 terms for senators and 3 for congressmen. No full pay retirement or benefits for life. Also, a period of service in the military, peace corps or maybe a couple of other organizations should be a requirement. Who better to take care of our country than someone who has defended it?
Of course, this has nothing to do with the thread topic. Socialism is an economic system. Elected officials not governing is a political issue.

For your information, Congressman don't get full pay retirement. Their pension is based upon the federal pension system that is based upon years of service.

Also, how do you mandate military service? What you are saying is that if I haven't joined the military by the oldest age allowable I can't run for Congress when I am 50. That makes no sense. It also presumes military service gives someone something useful that civilians lack. There are a number of great presidents, senators and members of congress that never served in the military.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top