“Likewise, I don’t think any country in Western Europe is socalist.”
Wait, does that mean you’re cool with running stuff along western european lines? I could probably agree to that.
So I suppose you’re right, I’m not a pure socialist in that I’m not advocating the nationalization all of industry, if that was the ‘all the implications’ bit. Just like most capitalists aren’t really pure free-market capitalists, because that would be, frankly, a hellish scenario of tyranny-by-the-wealthy. But, just like most industrialized countries, I believe we should have services which improve the common good (healthcare, education, sewers) paid for in common, and that the more money you make, the more (exponentially) you should pay, so that people who don’t have money can also receive base-line benefits, benefits which allow them to contribute these great innovations that DIBS assumes only come from rich people in positions of power.
“Yes, lets give more to the entitled who don’t and won’t lift a finger.”
I assume, DIBs, you mean people who earn income from interest, or inherit money, or are paid rent, right? Because it would be silly of you to mean that poor people are poor because they want to be, or that the rich are rich because they are better and more deserving.
no way! there is no humor in canada. everyone seems to have a stick up their butt.
*rob*
let me say once again, if this is what awaits, let’s fill out the immigration forms to Canada
“Likewise, I don’t think any country in Western Europe is socalist.”
Wait, does that mean you’re cool with running stuff along western european lines? I could probably agree to that.
So I suppose you’re right, I’m not a pure socialist in that I’m not advocating the nationalization all of industry, if that was the ‘all the implications’ bit. Just like most capitalists aren’t really pure free-market capitalists, because that would be, frankly, a hellish scenario of tyranny-by-the-wealthy. But, just like most industrialized countries, I believe we should have services which improve the common good (healthcare, education, sewers) paid for in common, and that the more money you make, the more (exponentially) you should pay, so that people who don’t have money can also receive base-line benefits, benefits which allow them to contribute these great innovations that DIBS assumes only come from rich people in positions of power.
“Yes, lets give more to the entitled who don’t and won’t lift a finger.”
I assume, DIBs, you mean people who earn income from interest, or inherit money, or are paid rent, right? Because it would be silly of you to mean that poor people are poor because they want to be, or that the rich are rich because they are better and more deserving.
By Petebklyn on July 29, 2010 11:13 AM
how about dirty filthy rich?
Now you’re getting into fetish territory.
how about dirty filthy rich?
quote:
Done. ‘filthy rich’ = >$5m in total assets. Probably includes half of park slope.
drop the “rich” part. some look filthy, yes, but RARELY do i ever see someone who looks filthy rich.
*rob*
So now you want to tax capital as well as just income?
(and I’m in the other half of Park Slope!)
I see that. Seems that you ultra-conserveratives that go out and drink have to hang out with us lefties or drink alone.
Done. ‘filthy rich’ = >$5m in total assets. Probably includes half of park slope.
Not if they have $4MM in liabilities!!!!