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.
Capitalism is the greatest economic model in human history and is responsible for lifting billions out of poverty. The poorest person on this planet is better off than the poorest person on Earth in the 1600s, around the time capitalism was developed.
That said, it is time for the GOP to recognize that Capitalism and free markets, for all of its benefits, still leaves people behind and to heed the words of Jesus when he said "the poor you will always have with you." (Mark 14:7)
This is why I am voting for John Kasich, he is a man with sound conservative principles, but has consistently acknowledged that our system still leaves people behind and that they need to be helped.
Why is caring for the poor considered a taxpayer responsibility? Where in Jesus's teachings is that made clear?
I, as an individual, am compelled to have empathy and provide help to the poor. I've seen NOTHING that suggests that the American taxpayer, as an entity, is on the hook for the same.
Bernie Sanders against John Kasich might actually be a good race, but I don't have any faith in the GOP voters when it comes to picking their candidates.
Now this is rich! You don't have faith in Republican's when picking their candidates, but you fail to recognize that Democrats will pick Hillary over your chosen one Bernie? LOL That awesome faith in Democrats should you leave you wanting, but you dang sure won't admit it!
Why is caring for the poor considered a taxpayer responsibility? Where in Jesus's teachings is that made clear?
I, as an individual, am compelled to have empathy and provide help to the poor. I've seen NOTHING that suggests that the American taxpayer, as an entity, is on the hook for the same.
It's a question of scale. Relying on individual donations can't reach the breadth of population with healthcare infrastructure, for example, and donations sryvup when the economy goes down and need becomes the highest.
It'sjust logically better to have a system in place that is more consistent.
Now this is rich! You don't have faith in Republican's when picking their candidates, but you fail to recognize that Democrats will pick Hillary over your chosen one Bernie? LOL That awesome faith in Democrats should you leave you wanting, but you dang sure won't admit it!
It's a question of scale. Relying on individual donations can't reach the breadth of population with healthcare infrastructure, for example, and donations sryvup when the economy goes down and need becomes the highest.
It'sjust logically better to have a system in place that is more consistent.
But none of these things (ie. healthcare system) are jeopardized by capitalism. In fact, capitalism is the reason they exist.
Hillary won't win without some incredible maneuvering her time passed in 2008.
Yes, it remains to be seen. But all indications are that the media and donors want a coronation. If Democrats despise Hillary, then they should make it known. Quick.
But none of these things are jeopardized by capitalism. In fact, capitalism is the reason they exist.
Ok. When did I ever say anything against capitalism? I was just touting it so long as we recognize it's not perfect and needs support. Not sure what your post is in reference to.
Yes, it remains to be seen. But all indications are that the media and donors want a coronation. If Democrats despise Hillary, then they should make it known. Quick.
The point of the graph is that they are. Some polls have Sanders up by over 10 points already.
This is pre debate. Hillary will have the rug pulled out fr underneath her when she has to talk about issues.
Ok. When did I ever say anything against capitalism? I was just touting it so long as we recognize it's not perfect and needs support. Not sure what your post is in reference to.
Well, the OP is about capitalism and leaving the poor behind. I assumed that your comment about scaling systems using taxpayer monies was about not leaving the poor behind. Thus, my response is that scaled systems are not jeopardized by capitalism. So what exactly is the OP's point if we're talking about scaled systems funded by taxpayers? I took the OP to mean people have a obligation to help the poor in accordance with Jesus' teachings. People and taxpayers as an entity are different in my view.
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.
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.
