Model shows how surge in wealth inequality may be reversed

July 30, 2015 by Lisa Zyga, Phys.org report
For economic data up to 2010, the model (red line) closely matches the actual wealth inequality (blue line), which is measured by the share of wealth owned by the top 10% of the population. After 2010, possible scenarios are those described in the graph above (where α represents an increase in the dominance of capital income over labor income), as well as a simple linear extrapolation of the wealth inequality during 2000-2010 (dashed blue line) and predictions based on the model (dashed red line). The results suggest that, by increasing private savings to 10% in 2030 (squares), wealth inequality can be reversed. Credit: Berman, et al.

(Phys.org)—For many Americans, the single biggest problem facing the country is the growing wealth inequality. Based on income tax data, wealth inequality in the US has steadily increased since the mid-1980s, with the top 10% of the population currently owning about 73% of the country's wealth. In a new paper published in PLOS ONE, researchers have quantitatively analyzed several of the major factors that affect wealth inequality dynamics, and found that the most crucial factor associated with the recent surge in wealth inequality since the '80s has been the dramatic decrease in personal savings, followed closely by a large increase in the dominance of capital income over labor income.

Taking these findings a step further, the researchers showed in their model that reversing these two trends can prevent and even reverse a further increase in wealth inequality in the future. The researchers hope that the findings will lead to policies that reproduce these results in the real world. But progress in this area may not even have to rely solely on policy changes, as the researchers note that the 2008 financial crisis has caused Americans to save more money, potentially bringing an opportunity to restrain some of the growth in wealth inequality.

The research was led by Eshel Ben-Jacob, who was Professor at the School of Physics & Astronomy at Tel-Aviv University, but passed away unexpectedly before the paper was published. Ben-Jacob was perhaps best known for his work on bacterial self-organization and its applications in complex systems. The other coauthors of the paper are Yonatan Berman, a PhD student, and Yoash Shapira, an adjunct researcher, both at Tel-Aviv University.

Overall, the researchers' model closely reproduces the wealth inequality dynamics in the US from 1930 to 2010, as measured by the share of wealth owned by the top 10% of the population. As the researchers explain in their paper, the usefulness of the new model arises from its ability to quantify the contributions of various factors affecting wealth inequality dynamics, and consequently to serve as a test-bed for predicting the outcomes of future policies.

"The greatest significance of the work is that we succeeded in quantifying the relative effects of different factors contributing to wealth inequality," Berman told Phys.org. "The inequality surge is not due to a single factor. Therefore, in order to understand it better, such a quantification is important. I also think that a very interesting finding is how important personal savings are. Though other elements may be equally important in general, the dramatic decrease in personal savings is probably the single most important ingredient contributing to the increase in wealth inequality in the past 30 years."

Shapira added that, while the dominance of capital income is a very complicated matter that involves the technological change of the past few decades, dealing with the savings issue is relatively easier.

Among the other main results, the researchers' model reveals the complex implications of economic mobility—that is, how easily individuals can change their economic status. On one hand, mobility plays an essential role in restraining wealth inequality, and becomes even more important when the economy becomes dominated by capital income, as is the current trend; when the researchers did not include economic mobility in their model, the model-market correlation dropped dramatically. On the other hand, the researchers also found that further increasing mobility above its current value is likely to have little effect on wealth inequality, suggesting that policies that target improving economic mobility may not be as effective as those that promote increasing personal savings and reducing the dominance of capital income over labor income.

In the future, the researchers plan to investigate how such policies may affect other aspects of the economy besides wealth inequality. For example, an increased savings rate may have the unintended consequence of reducing GDP growth, which tends to increase wealth inequality. Future work will require optimization between these two outcomes.

Other areas of future work will involve investigating the effects of various tax strategies and other additional factors that contribute to dynamics, as well as applying the model to the economies of different countries.

Explore further: Wealth inequality doubles among US households

More information: Yonatan Berman, et al. "Modeling the Origin and Possible Control of the Wealth Inequality Surge." PLOS ONE. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130181

Related Stories

Rich-poor gap and the risk of civil war

June 4, 2014

Researchers from the University of Tübingen have found that the greater the disparity in wealth, the greater the risk of civil war. "If unequal division passes a certain level, the effects within a region are enormous," ...

The deep roots of economic inequality

May 23, 2014

A special issue of Science explores the origins of human inequality, drawing on research by SFI Professor Sam Bowles and collaborators.

Risk of disability rises in states with income inequality

November 13, 2007

A massive survey conducted by researchers at the University of Toronto reveals Americans living in states with high rates of income inequality are significantly more likely to have a disability that limits the completion ...

Recommended for you

Fat from 558 million years ago reveals earliest known animal

September 20, 2018

Scientists from The Australian National University (ANU) and overseas have discovered molecules of fat in an ancient fossil to reveal the earliest confirmed animal in the geological record that lived on Earth 558 million ...

242 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Milou
5 / 5 (4) Jul 30, 2015
It is nice to know I am on the right track with saving my money but, ending the wrong way with fees and loss of market value!
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (17) Jul 30, 2015
It' easy, plunder all the wealth like Greece, Zimbabwe, Venezuela and DPRK have done.
shavera
4.8 / 5 (18) Jul 30, 2015
rygge: I suspect the overwhelming majority of people in developed nations don't have an issue with some degree of wealth inequality. You can actually see this when you poll people on how they would like to see wealth distributed, how they think it's distributed, and how it really is distributed.
https://www.washi...quality/

The issue of the day is not one of "plundering wealth" or "robbing the wealthy" but one of questioning the underlying assumptions about our economic model that determine how wealthy the wealthy can get.

For instance, should your wealth be based on your labor/merit or based on what family you're born into? Does wealth, and the capacity to buy luxuries in life, reflect the 'real' good you bring to society, or is it abstracted away? Does wealth mean you can legalize *specific* forms of theft that allow you to gain more money immorally?
dogbert
2.3 / 5 (22) Jul 30, 2015
The problem is not wealth inequality. There has always been very wealthy people and there has always been very poor people. The problem is an over reaching government which through various means of control by taxation, regulation and graft, created and sustains a stagnant and even recessive economy. This is severely hindering the poor from becoming middle income and is forcing many middle income workers into poverty.

Taking wealth away from the wealthy will not fix this. Allowing and promoting a growing economy will fix it. But our huge government is unwilling to restrain itself.
jdbertron
2.1 / 5 (12) Jul 30, 2015
First thing they should have done is check out the existing research on this. Austrian economics has explained this for years. The mechanisms are well understood.

https://mises.org...cycles-0
denglish
2.9 / 5 (24) Jul 30, 2015
How to reverse wealth inequality:

Do:
Get an education.
Get a marketable skill.
Work hard.
Obey the law.
Don't squander your money.

Don't:
Think you are entitled.
Rely on entitlement programs.
Break the law.
Be lazy.
Blame others for your failings.

I am sick of this wealth inequality crap. It is another way of leading people that are inherently hard-working (and can get there themselves) down the path of socialism.
denglish
3.9 / 5 (7) Jul 30, 2015
I'm making over $15k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life,,,

THIS IS WHAT I DO...... ďĽ�ďĽ�ďĽ�.­E­A­R­N­M­O­R­E­9­.­­ďĽ�­ďĽ�­ďĽ�

Or you can do this! LOL
Maggnus
4.7 / 5 (14) Jul 30, 2015
An article on wealth redistribution and market intervention by government. Rygg's head probably exploded.
docile
Jul 30, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (20) Jul 30, 2015
questioning the underlying assumptions about our economic model that determine how wealthy the wealthy can get.


Why do you care?

Does wealth mean you can legalize *specific* forms of theft that allow you to gain more money immorally?


Power is the real issue, not wealth.

Earning wealth by creating products and services people want to buy is win-win for all.

Rent seeking, using the power of the state to plunder is a loser for all.

Those complaining about wealth inequality are the ones who caused it by supporting and promoting more govt intervention into the economy.
That's why most on Wall Street support democrats and RINOs. Most on Wall Street will benefit if either Hillary or Jeb are elected.
But they are not very keen on conservatives who want to limit the size and scope of the state.

Keep up the viscous cycle of govt control and all will be poor, like DPRK.
ryggesogn2
2.2 / 5 (17) Jul 30, 2015
Of course the other issue is how is wealth defined?

Is wealth the amount of fiat currency in a bank account? Is it property producing goods and devices? Govt bonds owed by taxpayers?

"When people are hungry and unhappy, the state cannot survive if the people know others are better off. The state uses propaganda, misinformation, and censorship to make an already captive citizenry even more confused and submissive."
https://mises.org...ocialism
cjn
4.6 / 5 (14) Jul 30, 2015
The more money the government takes, the more money it gets to allocate. The "rich get richer" because they can influence how that money is allocated.
Yuli Ban
5 / 5 (8) Jul 30, 2015
How to reverse wealth inequality:

Do:
Get an education.
Get a marketable skill.
Work hard.
Obey the law.
Don't squander your money.

Don't:
Think you are entitled.
Rely on entitlement programs.
Break the law.
Be lazy.
Blame others for your failings.

I am sick of this wealth inequality crap. It is another way of leading people that are inherently hard-working (and can get there themselves) down the path of socialism.


Nothing wrong there. That said, I'd like to add "start an automated worker cooperative" to that list. Become a technostist is also an option.

I'd also like to disagree with the idea that wealth inequality is "crap." There's a difference between "we all earn the same" and "income inequality." If there were no income inequality, the middle class would be bringing in an average of $250,000 right now— no inflation. Nope, only $49,000. Where did all that money go? It wasn't lost due to laziness or entitlements— someone took it.
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (20) Jul 30, 2015
'Wealth inequality' and 'income inequality' are not equivalent.

Where did all that money go? It wasn't lost due to laziness or entitlements— someone took it.


In a free market world, no one can take it, without going to jail.

In a rent seeking, socialist world where the govt controls the banks, people who run monopolies like Freddie and Fannie are rewarded for being good govt agents.

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.8 / 5 (13) Jul 30, 2015
Some peoples dey just isn't as good at makin money as duh next guy yu kno?

Intellects vary widely due to the fragile nature of our oversized brains. Our brains are susceptible to genetic deformity, prenatal damage due to malnutrition, drugs, and environmental toxins.

They are further hindered by infections, poisons, injury, and abuse throughout adolescence.

And then shortly thereafter they begin to deterioriate.

As a result many people are doomed to a life of confusion, lack of concentration, and self-medication to treat subliminal pain.

Some defects can actually aid in income generation such as bipolarity and psychopathy but this is to the detriment of society as a whole.

People should try as hard as they can but for many, trying is very painful indeed.

So until we can eliminate the disparity in intellects we will be faced with the necessity of entitlements. The capable will be obligated to provide for the less so, or face the very real prospect of revolution.
El_Nose
3.4 / 5 (10) Jul 30, 2015
@ ryggesogn2

I agree walth and income inequality are different -- and then you kinda went off deep end.

free market has nothing to do with law enforcing penalties - look at China, considered a free market but systematically not protecting intellectual property allows people to steal

Freddie and Fannie are not monopolies - just government agencies that facilitate mortgages

----
My issue with the system in the US is that since the 80's lowering of taxes on the richest down to 30-36% we have seen runaway inequality. Yes education does help, and saving money will make you more stable. But dreaming that you will be able to retire at 50 or 60 is your parents dream and not practical in the new world. Retirement by 70 is now the practical and as soon as people accept this they will be happier.

Governments by the people should cater to the needs of the people. And people expect the government to enforce laws and impose policy that is in the public interest.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.9 / 5 (11) Jul 30, 2015
Ryggy doesn't realize that free markets will never work until everybody is as smart as him. Or smarter.
denglish
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 30, 2015
It wasn't lost due to laziness or entitlements— someone took it.

Someone didn't take it, people make what they bring to the payer. some people make more for a payer, so they'll get more.
Noumenon
2.5 / 5 (14) Jul 30, 2015
Wealth is not a static quantity that is artificially distributed,.... therefore the notion of 'inequality' as a defect of some sort, does not even logically apply. It doesn't even qualify as only being wrong.

There is an inequality of wealth creation,.... therefore it follows there is an inequality of wealth ownership. There is an inequality of job creation, ....therefore it follows there is an inequality of income.

Wealth inequality and income inequality are simply natural consequences of a free economic society.

The democrats will use this faux issue of "income inequality" in the next election, to incite their ignorant voting base, knowing full well that the solution is far worse than the supposed problem.
Noumenon
1.8 / 5 (12) Jul 30, 2015
Ryggy doesn't realize that free markets will never work until everybody is as smart as him. Or smarter.


And you fail to understand that the role of government in a free society is not in correcting natural injustices. In any case, you just pulled out of you ass that there is a measureable correlation between wealth and intellectual capacity, as opposed to effort and personal accountability.

My issue with the system in the US is that since the 80's lowering of taxes on the richest down to 30-36% we have seen runaway inequality.

So what. Lowering taxes at that time improved the economy, while increasing taxes could not have had an effect on the average person retirement age.

ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (12) Jul 30, 2015
Freddie and Fannie are not monopolies - just government agencies that facilitate mortgages

You just stated they ARE monopolies. They are 'govt sponsored enterprises', aka a monopoly.

lowering of taxes on the richest down to 30-36%

Lowering tax RATES raised more revenue as it was more cost effective to pay the tax than try to hide the income.
look at China, considered a free market

By whom?
Governments by the people should cater to the needs of the people.

NO. Govts 'by the people' should protect the life, liberty and property of each individual.
'Catering to the needs of the people'-which people?
pauljpease
3.5 / 5 (8) Jul 30, 2015

Rent seeking, using the power of the state to plunder is a loser for all.


Do you know what rent seeking is? It's not what the government does. Rent seeking is like what my former students' parents would do. I taught at a private school where I did not get any benefits, requiring my pregnant wife to go without healthcare during the first part of her pregnancy. Meanwhile, the parents sending their kids to this school (where 18 year olds would be caught literally weighing cocaine out in the school to sell to other students and no police were called and students were not even expelled) had so much extra money I remember a famous conversation with one student on a Monday morning. "How was your weekend?" "Good, we spent it at our new house." "Oh, did you move?" "No, my parents just bought an extra house." What do you think they did with the "extra house"? Rent seeking, buying that property would give them the greatest return on their capital. Meanwhile, no healthcare for me.
Noumenon
1 / 5 (10) Jul 30, 2015
... policies that target improving economic mobility may not be as effective as those that promote increasing personal savings ....


The foundational premise of liberal-progressivism, that there could even exist effective government button-pushers and dial-turners, to solve any 'problem' that can be mined from social statistics, is laughable.

The greatest threat to personal liberty is the liberal-progressive, and their army of statisticians.

denglish
3 / 5 (10) Jul 30, 2015
Rent seeking, buying that property would give them the greatest return on their capital. Meanwhile, no healthcare for me.

There is no fault to be found in wanting to make one's wealth valuable.

There is a TON of fault to be found in poorly negotiating one's contract to the extent that healthcare was not provided or at least subsidized by the employer.

Noumenon
2.2 / 5 (13) Jul 30, 2015
Rent seeking, buying that property would give them the greatest return on their capital. Meanwhile, no healthcare for me.


Did you try begging them for money? Did you try to explain to their parents that you are more deserving of thier money than their kids? Did you use the "not fair" card like a four year old?
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (11) Jul 30, 2015
Do you know what rent seeking is? It's not what the government does.


You assume the govt is powerless to stop rent seeking?

Rent seeking is like what my former students' parents would do. I taught at a private school where I did not get any benefits


You make zero sense on this one. Don't work at that private school.

Rent seeking: " The idea is simple but powerful. People are said to seek rents when they try to obtain benefits for themselves through the political arena."
http://www.econli...ing.html
El_Nose
5 / 5 (7) Jul 30, 2015
@ryggesogn2

Freddie buys mortgages - thats it, and they do it in secondary markets.
Fannie helps create a larger secondary market for selling mortgages.

This is not a monopoly -- if you own a home then you know your mortgage has been bought and sold 5 times in as many years to various banks and other companies. This is the definition of competition.

Governments by the people have values determined by those people. Protection of life liberty and property only apply in the US, other countries have vastly different values. Take France or western Europe or Japan democracies do not look the same or have the same values

Lowering federal tax levels increased government spending more than anything else in the 80's. Bush senior was forced to raise taxes to get it back under control and was ousted from office by his own party for doing the right thing.

http://www.theatl.../265185/
El_Nose
4.7 / 5 (6) Jul 30, 2015
the lowering of taxes on the rich and the lowering of capitol gains taxes, did spur some growth, but the computer age was coming no matter what, and the dot com bubble was going to happen no matter what, we saw the entry of internet marketing as far back as the BBS systems of 1980.

war and recession have lead to the current 11.5 trillion debt. The inability of Congress to stop spending on defense. The thought that cutting back on research and education will be a benefit. The problem is we still elect the most uneducated House of Reps and the most educated Senators and expect balance when they can elect to give themselves a raise. Our congress needs something that institutionalizes a balance that they currently do not have.

But continuing to lower taxes is killing us. A few years of pain and tightening belts and paying taxes will have to come. Or we will end up like Greece. And this is from the guy that says debt isn't THAT bad, but right now we are not trying to control .
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 30, 2015
inability of Congress to stop spending on defense

DoD has been cut drastically.

But continuing to lower taxes is killing us.

Taxes are rising and that is killing economies.

end up like Greece.


Detroit and many other 'liberal'/socialist govts are bankrupt because of high taxes and unfunded pension obligations to state workers.
Just like Greece.

Protection of life liberty and property only apply in the US, other countries have vastly different values


Really? Is that why so many want to come to the USA where the USA once valued life, liberty and property?
ryggesogn2
2.2 / 5 (6) Jul 30, 2015
"Remarkably, the opening up of the Indian economy has enabled dalits to break out of their traditional low occupations and start businesses. The Dalit Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DICCI) now boasts over 3,000 millionaire members. This revolution is still in its early stages, but is now unstoppable."
"During the socialist days of India's command economy, the lucky few with industrial licenses ran virtual monopolies and placed orders for supplies and logistics entirely with members of their own caste. But after the 1991 reforms opened the floodgates of competition, businesses soon discovered that to survive, they had to find the most competitive inputs. What mattered was the price of your supplier, not his caste."
http://www.cato.o...e-system
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 30, 2015
Vastly different values?
"One crime that is more typical of Communism than some other shocking crimes is mass rape. Just in 1944/45, the Red Army is estimated to have raped some three-to-four million women from Ukraine in the East to Vienna and Berlin in the West. The surviving women were not allowed to talk about the crime and it was only in the last few years that these elderly ladies could be persuaded to speak out. Most of the documentaries were aired in Germany, Austria or Hungary but were never shown on major channels in the West, such as the History Channel or National Geographic.

But mass rape by Chinese Communist forces is reported in Tibet, notably against Buddhist nuns, it is not unique to the Soviet military.

One cannot help wondering, where the feminists are in all this."
http://www.intell...ommunism
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (8) Jul 30, 2015
Wealth is not a static quantity that is artificially distributed,.... therefore the notion of 'inequality' as a defect of some sort, does not even logically apply. It doesn't even qualify as only being wrong
You need to distinguish between wants and needs. Necessities are a finite quantity. The include places to live, clean water to drink, transportation, etc.

As the rich get richer they tend to usurp necessities. Many people who work in Manhattan can't afford to live there. This is not their fault. Competition for living space is what has driven them out of the market.

But as long as they are willing to suffer a 5 hour daily commute (because they have to) the rich have their maids and taxi drivers.
joeyfrango
1 / 5 (3) Jul 30, 2015
">There's a difference between 'we all earn the same' and 'income inequality.' >If there were no income inequality(...)"
hahaha right, I just find hilarious how cowards leftists can be because of how little base they can sustain over their own ilogic ideology of material equality.
Who fkn cares about equality, it is materially inconceivable by humans hands. It is UNATURAL excepet you wanna live like idiot animals in the wild. Humans are no way equal rather than their biological part, including socialization, everything else involving humanity is differently processed in our own minds and by our humans bodies throught the world, meaning we don't show labor habilities equally, nor comic sense, nor beauty sense. Nothing that makes us especial creatures of god besides the anatomy.
grondilu
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 31, 2015
> For many Americans, the single biggest problem facing the country is the growing wealth inequality.

Inequality can not be a problem for an individual. Poverty can. The fact that some people earn more than others is not supposed to matter.
Eikka
4 / 5 (8) Jul 31, 2015
look at China, considered a free market but systematically not protecting intellectual property allows people to steal


"Intellectual property" is an artifical and fictious concept created by the state. It doesn't exist in reality, and there is nothing to steal.

You can't actually own ideas like you own real physical property, which is why intellectual property is really an euphemism for a monopoly granted by the state, and as such it's directly part of crony capitalism - a system where corruption and close relations to the state determines who succeeds on the market.

So ironically, the Chinese market is actually free-er in that respect than any western market, which are limited in innovation and growth by arbitrary licensing contracts and fees and patent trolls who exploit the system, litigating each other and wasting money over quibbles about whose icons have rounded corners.

Eikka
3.9 / 5 (7) Jul 31, 2015
But as long as they are willing to suffer a 5 hour daily commute (because they have to) the rich have their maids and taxi drivers.


It doesn't take that much to satisfy the rich in their trivialities, because there simply aren't that many rich people and they can't consume infinite amounts.

The real problem we have as a society is that we're unable to separate productive from unproductive work. All the people suffering their 5 hour commute are locked in poverty because they actually produce no net wealth - only "services" which serve no real purpose.

The people are trying to serve trivialities to the rich to gain access to their money, but that only consumes wealth, and all the money they spend just goes straight back to the rich who own everything. Furthermore, the rich aren't even their biggest customer, but other poor people who end up wasting their money on the same trivialities in trying to emulate the rich.

ryggesogn2
2.7 / 5 (7) Jul 31, 2015
n euphemism for a monopoly granted by the state,


So is a deed.

Protection of private property is the one legitimate function of the state.
If your house, or your ideas, or your factory is not protected by the monopolist in violence, the state, violence will no longer be the monopoly of the state and individuals must fight to protect their property.
The benefit of protecting intellectual property is that those intellectuals are incentivized to develop those ideas and profit from them.
If their ideas can be stolen by others, why should they waste their time to create?

Vietvet
3 / 5 (4) Jul 31, 2015


"Intellectual property" is an artifical and fictious concept created by the state. It doesn't exist in reality, and there is nothing to steal.

@eikka

Just admit you've pirated (stole) a bunch of stuff off the web and you're trying to justify it.

docile
Jul 31, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 31, 2015
The real problem we have as a society is that we're unable to separate productive from unproductive work.


That is not society's problem.

only "services" which serve no real purpose.


If someone is willing to pay, it serves the buyer's purpose. That's all that matters.

the Chinese market is actually free-er


If the Chinese only steal their ideas from others, they will never learn or reward innovation and will never be innovative.
Nikola Tesla was not rewarded at home for his ideas, but was rewarded in the USA to the benefit of Tesla and the USA.
docile
Jul 31, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (6) Jul 31, 2015
Currently most of high-tech research at the USA is done with Asians


In the USA, not China.

Why don't they do their high tech research in China?
gkam
2.2 / 5 (10) Jul 31, 2015
Ryggy will be up for days, now, screaming "Socialist!" as loud as he can.

Ryggy, stop using our roads and the internet!

We are approaching Feudalism in economics with the right-wing theories. Look at what happened to the missing middle class under Reagan, Poppy Bush and Dubya.
denglish
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 31, 2015
Ryggy will be up for days, now, screaming "Socialist!" as loud as he can.

Ryggy, stop using our roads and the internet!

We are approaching Feudalism in economics with the right-wing theories. Look at what happened to the missing middle class under Reagan, Poppy Bush and Dubya.

"Missing Middle class"

This is the same person that said the US sold nuclear secrets to Pakistan and North Korea. Tack on the false claims of education and military service, and this person's input isn't worth a horse's output.

Be very careful of the fringe liberals. they are nothing but hate, wanting to make you feel guilty for wanting to be better. 'It's inequal!" they say. "Get down here with the rest of us, be dependent like a good little loser!".

The basic liberal is good. They offer ideas; sometimes very good ones. But these people that would have you hate your country, its time for them to leave our country.
gkam
2.8 / 5 (9) Jul 31, 2015
"This is the same person that said the US sold nuclear secrets to Pakistan and North Korea."
--------------------------------

No, I didn't. If you want to make charges, get it right. I said we had the chance to stop AQ Khan during the Poppy Bush years, and didn't. I also reminded you of when Pakistan got the krytrons, the Neutron-generators used to time nuclear weapons, from Texass.
Zzzzzzzz
5 / 5 (2) Jul 31, 2015
"In a free market, no one can take it without going to jail." The funniest, most ignorant, and severely incorrect posting of the year......
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 31, 2015
"In a free market, no one can take it without going to jail." The funniest, most ignorant, and severely incorrect posting of the year......


If the govt can legally do something that you would go to prison for, that law must be abolished.
Why can a state, ostensibly a collective of individuals, be able to commit acts the individual is not allowed to commit?
In a market free of govt meddling, sellers must persuade customers to purchase, and customers cannot legally plunder the seller. The exchange must be mutually agreeable to both parties.

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.9 / 5 (7) Jul 31, 2015
"Intellectual property" is an artifical and fictious concept created by the state. It doesn't exist in reality, and there is nothing to steal.
So if I put a years worth of work into developing an idea which can make me a lot of money, you're saying that it's OK for others to steal it before I can do so.

But if I put the same amount of work into a fabulous watch, you would say that it's a crime to steal it before I can sell it.

This makes no sense.

It's the work that is valuable. People justly deserve to be compensated for it based on it's relative value, whether it results in a physical object or an entirely intellectual result.

Rossi for instance has worked very hard on what is apparently an easy to reverse-engineer energy source. And he is not obligated to share it with anyone until he is able to reap the profits from it.
denglish
1 / 5 (6) Jul 31, 2015
"This is the same person that said the US sold nuclear secrets to Pakistan and North Korea."
--------------------------------

No, I didn't. If you want to make charges, get it right. I said we had the chance to stop AQ Khan during the Poppy Bush years, and didn't. I also reminded you of when Pakistan got the krytrons, the Neutron-generators used to time nuclear weapons, from Texass.

Put me back on ignore you idiot.

Another of your lies....you just don't stop!

This person is an example of the liberal lunatic fringe. Observe it, memorize it. Know how to spot it at every turn, and revile it at every opportunity.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 31, 2015
(Continued from the post I couldn't edit)

-And that's exactly what rossi and IH intend to do.
http://www.e-catw...etplace/
Uncle Ira
4.2 / 5 (10) Jul 31, 2015
In dense aether model the "surge in inequality" is the similar manifestation of spontaneous symmetry braking, like the separation of phases during cooling.


@ Zephir-Skippy. This the wealthy economy article Cher, not the space article. How you think we can bottle up your aethers and get wealthy from it?

Of course this inequality can be reversed, but we need to return into unisex hippie times at the end of 60's,


Seems to ol Ira-Skippy that you have already returned back there and found some really good drugs waiting on you.

gkam
2.5 / 5 (13) Jul 31, 2015
denglish does not like any truth inconvenient to what he wants to believe, so he goes emotionally-ballistic. Irrationality is no excuse, denglish.

From the Federation of American Scientists:
1985

1985--ABC News reports that US believes Pakistan has `successfully tested' a `firing mechanism' of an atomic bomb by means of a non-nuclear explosion, and that US krytrons `have been acquired' by Pakistan.

1985--U.S. Nuclear Export Control Violation: Texas, krytrons (nuclear weapon triggers).

I guess I got it wrong: It was Reagan, not Poppy who bumbled around until they got krytrons from the home state of the vice-president.
denglish
2.6 / 5 (10) Jul 31, 2015
I guess I got it wrong: It was Reagan, not Poppy who bumbled around until they got krytrons from the home state of the vice-president.

Put me back on ignore you idiot.

Another of your lies....you just don't stop!

This person is an example of the liberal lunatic fringe. Observe it, memorize it. Know how to spot it at every turn, and revile it at every opportunity.

Anyone that is curious about the truth re: Pakistan's Nuclear Program, check this out. its actually a pretty interesting read:
https://en.wikipe...truction
EWH
not rated yet Jul 31, 2015
No substantive discussion here. Computer models are always suspect, particularly when economists are involved. Nevertheless, from the Kelly Criterion, which calculates the optimum bet size to maximize return for a given "edge", and indeed the very criterion of maximizing return on capital, the utility function of money is logarithmic, that is, the value of a gain is perceived relative to how much one already has. Utilitarianism posits that aggregate utility (AU) is what should be maximized. Given a fixed pie, that means AU is maximized by equal shares for all. Even taking into account the need to incentivize production with rewards for the more productive, the incentive for a given person becomes exponentially less effective per dollar the larger it grows, so optimum shares will vary according to the logarithm of productivity, so will be nearly equal.
EWH
5 / 5 (1) Jul 31, 2015
As has been noted since the 1930s, the problem with the current system is that the potential productivity of mechanized factories is much higher than demand. ("Demand" meaning desire + ability to pay.) Few workers are needed to produce stuff, so few workers have wages required to buy the products they produce. If the ownership of productive machinery were widely distributed and he machines either used in distributed production or leased to mass manufacturers, then we would have capital profits (rents) widely distributed, higher incomes, higher demand and higher standards of living. Distributed production gives additional advantages of having people produce for themselves, reducing costs of marketing, distribution, succession of profits, taxes, and regulatory burdens. See the excellent and erudite "The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto", by Kevin A. Carson, available free online.
denglish
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 01, 2015
It comes down to the politicians that want larger government convincing their constituency that there is some sort of class warfare going on, and that envy and destruction of that which is envied, is a virtuous trait. In the end, no-one is working towards a goal of realizing their potential and the resultant reward, creating a massive dependent class.

When success is vilified, there is something very, very wrong going on.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.8 / 5 (10) Aug 01, 2015
It doesn't take that much to satisfy the rich in their trivialities
You are guessing. Your trivialities include spending on infrastructure which only serve the rich, their vast real estate holdings, etc.

"A minority of the world's population (17%) consume most of the world's resources (80%), leaving almost 5 billion people to live on the remaining 20%. As a result, billions of people are living without the very basic necessities of life - food, water, housing and sanitation.

"Specifically, 1.2 billion (20%) of the world population now lives on less that $1/day... 800 million go to bed hungry every day, and 30,000 - 60,000 die each day from hunger alone. The story is the same, when it comes to other necessities like water, housing, education etc. On the flip side, we have increasing accumulation of wealth and power, where the world's 500 or so billionaires have assets of 1.9 trillion dollars, a sum greater than the income of the poorest 170 countries in the world."
denglish
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 01, 2015
where the world's 500 or so billionaires have assets of 1.9 trillion dollars, a sum greater than the income of the poorest 170 countries in the world."

It isn't hypocrisy, it is reality.

While tragic, nothing can be done about what you cite. Any efforts to equalize wealth are moot as long as corruption exists.

Also, giving hand outs emphasizes the wrong notions. Work, or get out and then work, or be poor and die. Nothing personal. Signed, Mother Nature.
antigoracle
3 / 5 (2) Aug 01, 2015
Easier said than done.
There is only one thing, the wealthy will see the poor have and let them keep, and that's their distance.
denglish
2 / 5 (4) Aug 01, 2015
Easier said than done.
There is only one thing, the wealthy will see the poor have and let them keep, and that's their distance.

Its not hypocrisy, its reality.

Have and have not. It will always be, despite our best intentions. Not everyone is created equal.
MR166
3 / 5 (4) Aug 01, 2015
Lets face it you need more than money to be wealthy. Just look at all the lottery winners, sports figures and even actors. Many of them were once wealthy and are now not. Financial education is a prime ingredient as is prudent investing vs. spending so much that there is little left for the future. Most of all if you want to be rich associate with rich people. You will be amazed by what you learn. If you hang out with poor people you will not gain the knowledge you need to make the correct decisions. Many, but not all, times they are poor for a reason. Just be aware that buying $50,000 dollar cars on credit and spending $100s on restaurant meals does not make you rich. You might look rich to others but you have just pawned your future.
sdrfz
2.3 / 5 (7) Aug 01, 2015

Socialism and income redistribution has always resulted in failed states. Look at Cuba, Venezula, North Korea, the USSR, Greece, Spain, Italy, and soon France. Socialism does not reward work, it rewards dependence on government, and makes people indolent and stupid.
billpress11
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 01, 2015
Quote from article: "found that the most crucial factor associated with the recent surge in wealth inequality since the '80s has been the dramatic decrease in personal savings, followed closely by a large increase in the dominance of capital income over labor income."

Although there are other factors, the taxing of capital income at less the 1/2 the rate of earned income is a big factor in the growing inequality of wealth in this country.

Another factor not even mentioned is the drastic reduction in the progressiveness in the income tax rates since 1980.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 02, 2015

"Dan Price, 31, tells the New York Times that things have gotten so bad he's been forced to rent out his house.

"I'm working as hard as I ever worked to make it work," he told the Times in a video that shows him sitting on a plastic bucket in the garage of his house. "I'm renting out my house right now to try and make ends meet myself."

The Times article said Price's decision ended up costing him a few customers and two of his "most valued" employees, who quit after newer employees ended up with bigger salary hikes than older ones.

Grant Moran, 29, also quit, saying the new pay-scale was disconcerting

"Now the people who were just clocking in and out were making the same as me," he told the paper. "It shackles high performers to less motivated team members.""
http://www.youngc...ds-meet/
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 02, 2015
Just like Greece:

"With CalPERS' actuaries demanding a pension funding increase from $3.7 billion to $7.25 billion by 2020, the state must either cut payroll by 30 percent or find a massive new tax source, like overturning Prop. 13.

California's massively underfunded pensions are due to both Republican and Democrat administrations granting benefits that are ludicrously more generous than private pensions, but also for hiring actuaries that have been making ludicrously optimistic estimates that investment returns would be high and that retired public employees would live shorter lives to "justify" low employer and employee pension contributions. "
http://www.breitb...prop-13/
Zzzzzzzz
4.5 / 5 (8) Aug 02, 2015
Quoting Breitbart news...... proof of a mind locked away in a fantasy world. This simple fact causes an intelligent observer to relegate any "facts" or opinions by this poster to the "complete fantasy and irrelevance" trash can. No value there whatsoever.
Zzzzzzzz
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 02, 2015
"It isn't hipocrisy, it's reality" - denglish, are you fool enough to think that hipocrisy isn't real? Amazing.
denglish
2 / 5 (4) Aug 02, 2015
"It isn't hipocrisy, it's reality" - denglish, are you fool enough to think that hipocrisy isn't real? Amazing.

Hypocrisy. No.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 02, 2015
Quoting Breitbart news...... proof of a mind locked away in a fantasy world. This simple fact causes an intelligent observer to relegate any "facts" or opinions by this poster to the "complete fantasy and irrelevance" trash can. No value there whatsoever.


A free press for a free people.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 02, 2015
A free press for a free people.

"According to the Media Research Center, in just one day, the various broadcast networks' news programs have already given the death of Cecil the Lion more coverage than two weeks of videos that appear to show Planned Parenthood senior officials ghoulishly trafficking illegally in dead baby parts:

Tuesday, the networks spent 5 minutes, 44 seconds during their evening news shows on Cecil — and that's not even counting the teasers. Wednesday morning, ABC, NBC and CBS lamented over the lion for 8 minutes, 17 seconds.

But they couldn't do the same for a story of babies "picked" apart by tweezers."
http://www.breitb...2-weeks/
Bookbinder
5 / 5 (3) Aug 02, 2015
The data may be fine but the interpretation is total Wall Street. The biggest impact on the reduction in savings is the compression of wages since Reagan came into office and the unions were eviscerated. Followed by the phoney claim that there was some sort of capital shortage justifying greater returns to capital. Total hooey. interest rates were high because The chairman had raised rates .
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (7) Aug 02, 2015
compression of wages since Reagan came into office and the unions were eviscerated.


interest rates were high because The chairman had raised rates .


Yet you don't lay any blame upon the current 'liberal' regime that has been creating billions $ out of thin air and spraying them around buying votes.
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (7) Aug 02, 2015
"Democrats are particularly infatuated with the demographic group of voters who are poor. Democrats provide many social programs for the poor. If you happen to be poor, you know what these social programs do. They pay you to stay poor.

Democrats favor a higher minimum wage. And they'll make sure you get a minimum wage. Forever.

Democrats want to give you health care that's free—and worth it.

Democrats will provide you with more opportunities to get an education and buy a house. A couple hundred thousand dollars of student loan debt and a huge mortgage that's underwater will keep you poor for sure."
http://www.weekly...l?page=2
yep
1 / 5 (3) Aug 02, 2015
Women ought to have the right to abort till the child is eighteen. The only say you ought to have is in taking care of the unwanted children that were not aborted so they do not end up as a statistic in books like freakonomics showing unwanted children grow up to commit crimes. Evidence shows abortions reduce violent crimes and prevent future murders the correlation is undeniable.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 02, 2015
Evidence shows abortions reduce violent crimes and prevent future murders the correlation is undeniable.


That's the evidence eugenicists used to control the undesirables. It's no coincidence the founder of Planned Parenthood supported eugenics.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Aug 02, 2015
" Free people are not equal, and equal people are not free.

Put another way, in terms of economics, think of it this way: Free people will earn different incomes. Where people have the same income, they cannot be free.
{How can science be free if the scientists are not?}
Economic equality in a free society is a snare and a delusion that redistributionists envision. But free people are different people, not programmable robots, so it should not come as a surprise that they earn different incomes. Our talents and abilities are not identical. We don't all work as hard. And even if we all were magically made equal in wealth tonight, we'd be unequal in the morning because some of us would spend our newfound wealth, and some of us would save it."
http://fee.org/fr...g-chance
Macrocompassion
not rated yet Aug 03, 2015
So macroeconomics study is now possible within astronautics and physics departments too! Hopefully this allows it to become the logical science that has not often be achieved by the humanities departments of economics of the past! The difference between the rich and poor has been known but not properly understood for many hundreds of years until in 1879 Henry George (US economist) explained the cause in his seminal book "Progress and Poverty". But the politics associated with the process of knowledge dissemination of those days (which is largely true even today), failed to continue what were basically logical and scientific reasonings. As a result very few people can properly explain this phenomena of inequality.

One place where it can be better explained is in my recent book that was the result of independent research work. I would gladly share it with the School of Physics & Astronomy at Tel-Aviv University chesterdh@hotmail.com for copy
docile
Aug 03, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
Ryggy
But they couldn't do the same for a story of babies "picked" apart by tweezers."


Oh looky - Ryggy tries to hijack another thread - and turn it into an abortion debate. Nice going troll.


No.
It's a debate about 'liberals'/socialism and their irrational hypocrisy.
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 03, 2015
" Free people are not equal, and equal people are not free.

Put another way, in terms of economics, think of it this way: Free people will earn different incomes. Where people have the same income, they cannot be free.
{How can science be free if the scientists are not?}


You don't hear bed-wetting liberals complain that some scientists receive more accolades for their contributions to science than others,.... and yet that is precisely what monetary income represents,... Value in the economy,.... as scientific insight is Value to science.
Noumenon
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 03, 2015
And even if we all were magically made equal in wealth tonight, we'd be unequal in the morning because some of us would spend our newfound wealth, and some of us would save it."


You could multiple by ten everyone's income tomorrow, and once the dust settles, it would not make any difference*, because monetary-amount represents objective intrinsic economic Value, which like water seeks it's natural path and never lies nor pretends things are equal that are not.

*of course, since it devalues the numerical monetary amount in relation to Value, doing the above, is a means of redistribution of cash wealth, but most rich people are invested in intrinsic value anyway, especially if they see the leftist threat of stealing approaching.
Noumenon
2 / 5 (4) Aug 03, 2015
Liberals would rather obfuscate the key elements that has created the greatest economy and standard of living in human history,... individualism, egoism, profit motive, competition, freedom and liberty,..... than to objectively analyize the historical failures of their own idealology.

Income and wealth inequality is only a defect in a communist country. It is categorically NOT a defect in a free market capitalist society that values personal liberty. The corrupt liberal mind would rather their ignorant voting base think otherwise.

The notion of "Income inequality", "wealth inequality", and "institutionalized racism",... are the greatest scams of 21st century,... purely invented by the charlatans on the left.

Noumenon
You don't hear bed-wetting liberals complain


Nice mature debate from Noumenon - as usual.


You should be thanking me for providing an escape route from the substance of my post.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
Why don't universities fix their grade inequality?
Why should those who work hard and are intelligent get better grades, get appointed to top research posts?
billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
" Free people are not equal, and equal people are not free.

Put another way, in terms of economics, think of it this way: Free people will earn different incomes. Where people have the same income, they cannot be free.
{How can science be free if the scientists are not?}


You don't hear bed-wetting liberals complain that some scientists receive more accolades for their contributions to science than others,.... and yet that is precisely what monetary income represents,... Value in the economy,.... as scientific insight is Value to science.

Not necessarily true because big money makes the rules by which big money is made. They love to tax themselves less than they tax YOU.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
Which is what you malevolently twist every debate in to. It is definitely not a debate about abortion.

Socialism is the underlying cause for all: income inequality; human life is mere tissue to be harvested; humans are slaves to the state; science must save 'humanity' by destroying humans;

I haven't read the books, but from from the TV show, Wayward Pines is a classic example of socialism in action where a despotic control freak murders humans to save humanity.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
They love to tax themselves less than they tax YOU.


How can they if they don't have the power?

Why do 'liberals' grant such state power to 'big money'?

Of course, it is the state that is the 'big money' as the state creates and controls the 'big money'.
In the fascist/socialist state, 'big business' serves the state.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
Another example of the failure of socialism:

"Puerto Rico defaulted on some of its debts this weekend after years of battling to stay current on its obligations, signalling the start of a long and contentious restructuring process for the US commonwealth's $72bn debt pile."
http://www.ft.com...152.html
MR166
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
"Quoting Breitbart news...... proof of a mind locked away in a fantasy world. This simple fact causes an intelligent observer to relegate any "facts" or opinions by this poster to the "complete fantasy and irrelevance" trash can. No value there whatsoever."

ZZ The US has never been more ignorant and less informed. The 90% of today's media outlets disseminate little more than leftest propaganda. Thank God for the internet and sites such as Breitbart.
Noumenon
2 / 5 (4) Aug 03, 2015
They love to tax themselves less than they tax YOU.


If that were true then there wouldn't be a progressive tax in place. I don't see the liberal rich donating money to the government, ... so why blame the rich for seeking legal means available to them of paying less tax? I see conservatives advocating for a consumption tax or a flat tax,... not liberals.

Not necessarily true because big money makes the rules by which big money is made.

Nature invented those rules,.... an intrinsic desire to better ones condition (natural egoism), .... competition and survival of the fittest,... an intrinsic desire for freedom.

Liberalism operates counter to nature, while free market capitalists take advantage of it.
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
"Of course, it is the state that is the 'big money' as the state creates and controls the 'big money'.
In the fascist/socialist state, 'big business' serves the state."

Rygg what happens when the few that control the biggest businesses also control the state? What is that called other than the final curtain for the middle class? Renewable energy subsidies and the murder of the coal industry are prime examples of this.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
Rygg what happens when the few that control the biggest businesses also control the state?


When the state seeks control of the means of production, it is socialism. When the state seeks control of of the people, it is socialism, social engineering.

'Income-inequality', 'wealth-inequality', 'institutionalized-racism', climate-change alarmism,... are all invented by the political left, to fool the masses in accepting socialistic change in form of government.

They can't be honest and just sell social engineering and liberal progressivism on its own merits because it would be rejected by the people, ....so they hide it behind "issues", that to the uninitiated (their ignorant voting base), ... sound legitimate without further thought.

Such is the corrupt liberal mind.
El_Nose
5 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
@ryggesogn2

a lot of ppl wish to come to the US... but not many from western European democracies. They like their values and way of life. Ppl who come here often are looking for economic opportunity and those ppl tend to come from countries that have an even greater wealth inequality.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
When the state seeks control of the means of production, it is socialism.


There is a fine line here the 'liberals' like to exploit to define socialism.

If the state outright owns the 'means of production', like PEMEX or the Saudi Oil, it's socialism. But if the state 'just' controls businesses with regulations, they say its not socialism. Which in their little minds is true. What it is is Fascism with the state acting as the organized crime boss getting his cut and controlling competition. Some businesses like this as they don't have to persuade customers to buy. They just get Guido to burn down the competition.
It's a wonderful thing to see state regulated taxis protesting the Cambridge, MA govt over UBER. I think the taxis have a valid point, but the solution is to deregulate taxis, not control UBER. Socialism is all about control so UBER should be prepared to be assimilated.
billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
Noumenon, where have you been? Big money made on money escapes the progressiveness of the tax code. It is flat tax that escapes the SS tax and most local income taxes. Then it is also tax at about 1/2 the rate of your EARNED income. Keep paying, they are laughing all the way to there second, third or more vacation homes and yachts.

Rygg2, money is power, power is influence, influence is what shapes all the laws we end up living by. So yes, they do have the power!
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
They like their values and way of life.

Until they run out of other people's money (OPM), like Greece.

Yes, and thousands of 'migrants' like that way of life too and are swarming into EU land, further depleting OPM.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
money is power,

Violence is power.
The state is the monopoly on violence.
Limit that monopoly and money can't buy the violence to control the lives of others.

billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
money is power,

Violence is power.
The state is the monopoly on violence.
Limit that monopoly and money can't buy the violence to control the lives of others.


Money buys violence all over the world. Remember Iraq from us and numerous other wars from many other countries in the world? Even ISIS could not create the terror it does for long without MONEY. Violence is also created by a lack of money, rebellions. But they soon need money to have a chance of succeeding in their goals or BIG money will "buy" an end to it.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
Money buys violence all over the world.

Violence exists first.
Violence is required to protect property to create wealth and then to protect that wealth.
Violence is not usually preferred in nature as it destroys wealth and risks life.
The Chinese discovered their Maoist communist violence was not creating wealth. Their present form of communist violence enables some wealth creation, yet has limits, as they are discovering.
Money can eanble more violence, but it is not money or wealth per se that creates the violence.
Only when that violence (govt power) is limited to protecting private property for each individual, does money play it's most significant role, improving the liberty and prosperity for all by promoting free trade of goods and services.
You assert money is power, yet how powerful is one of the richest men in world, Bill Gates?
He can't force Indians to use toilets.

billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
Quote Rygg2: "You assert money is power, yet how powerful is one of the richest men in world, Bill Gates? He can't force Indians to use toilets."

Now that is funny, I have no idea at all where that comes from. If you think for a second you have as much power politically as Bill Gates you are really naive. Oh, I could be mistaken, you may be one of the Koch brothers. He has 100 maybe 1000 times the political power of most of us . Yes money is power in today's world. Now if you want to go back into prehistory it was mostly brawn. Money has been getting the upper hand over brawn 1000's of years, more so every year. Money "buys" brawn!
And I kind of like it!

ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
The Gates Foundation has been trying to get Indians to use indoor toilets.
The Indians don't want them.
power politically as Bill Gates

Gates didn't have much political power when Bill Clinton went after him for not paying his political bribe money.
Clinton had the power of violence behind him. Gates had only money.
"Grown-up companies hire lobbyists. What's this guy's problem? Then it was regarded as foolish. This was not a game. There were big issues at stake. Next it came to be seen as arrogant: Who the hell does Microsoft think it is? Does it think it's too good to do what every other company of its size in the world is doing?"
http://articles.l...20110405
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
"As the Microsoft example suggests, the Washington culture of influence peddling is not entirely or even primarily the fault of the corporations that hire the lobbyists and pay the bills. It's a vast protection racket, practiced by politicians and political operatives of both parties. Nice little software company you've got here. Too bad if we have to regulate it, or if big government programs force us to raise its taxes. Your archrival just wrote a big check to the Washington Bureaucrats Benevolent Society. Are you sure you wouldn't like to do the same?"
http://articles.l...110405/2
When you have the power of violence, it's much easier to plunder wealth than creating wealth.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
you may be one of the Koch brothers. He has 100 maybe 1000 times the political power of most of us .


If the Koch brothers have so much power, why has socialism run rampant in the USA?
billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
Rygg2, money competes with money, not everyone with money wins every time, its same as it is with brawn. Nothing new there.

Oh yes, they do hire lobbyist, and exactly what do you think lobbyist get out of it, protection from violence or money? No, it is a trade of money for money, or power for power for them and the companies or individuals they are lobbying for.

And when Clinton was president where do you think he got his power (of violence) from, his personal wealth, Hilary or the government's money? As for Microsoft not paying a "bribe", that is just someones biased conjecture. After all monies given to politicians is really a bribe. Because ALL monies given to political candidates are GIVEN for a reason, POWER and INFLUENCE. Listen to me, remember what I want or need. In short give me the opportunity to get more money (power) to give you even more money for the next election.

When it comes to politics the words MONEY and POWER are almost always interchangeable.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
when Clinton was president where do you think he got his power (of violence) from


The law.

As for Indian toilets:

"More than 53 percent of Indian homes — about 70 percent in the villages — lack toilets. Poor sanitation and contaminated water cause 80 percent of the diseases afflicting rural India, and diarrhea is a leading killer of children younger than 5, UNICEF says."
"But building toilets is the easy part. Getting people to use them is the real challenge, officials say.

"We never asked for a toilet. Now we are stuck with it," said Natholi, 22, as he opened the squat toilet to show that it has not been used. His 62-year-old father peered in and shook his head. "Having a toilet so close to the house is not a good idea. The pit is too small; it will fill up quickly. I don't want the bother of cleaning it up frequently. Going out to the open field is healthier. The open breeze outside is better than sitting inside this tiny room.""
WashPost
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
"In March 2014, a second Reinvent the Toilet Fair was held in New Delhi, India, co-hosted by the Government of India's Department of Biotechnology and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, with the support of India's Ministry of Urban Development. India is uniquely positioned to be a global leader in the development of new sanitation technologies and a range of other innovative approaches to achieve sustainable gains in sanitation in India and abroad. The Reinvent the Toilet Fair: India aimed to stimulate discussion and spur partnerships to bring safe, affordable sanitation to the 2.5 billion people who lack access."
http://www.gatesf...hallenge
All that money and Gates can't force billions to use the toilet.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
As for Microsoft not paying a "bribe", that is just someones biased conjecture.


Gates and Microsoft should have told Clinton to go piss up a rope if the Clinton Justice Dept had no credible threat of violence, like putting people into jail, for not following their demands.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
"Black people are not a monolithic group, but what we are facing is something that's extreme — and that's poverty, that's homelessness, that's higher rates of joblessness, that's law enforcement invading our communities day in and day out — and we are uprising. And so this Black Spring is about really talking about a national uprising. And we should shoud be honored to talk about this moment.'
http://www.breitb...r-spike/

Socialists use lack of money as an excuse for violence to acquire more power.

billpress11
not rated yet Aug 03, 2015
As for Microsoft not paying a "bribe", that is just someones biased conjecture.


Gates and Microsoft should have told Clinton to go piss up a rope if the Clinton Justice Dept had no credible threat of violence, like putting people into jail, for not following their demands.

Why didn't he, could it be he wanted something else more important to him from the government? That is just the way things work.

As for the Indians, well it is their life and the life of their children. Look at the bright side it is not your money, it is Bill Gate's. And isn't disease a natural way of controlling population growth? Isn't that better than abortions in your eyes?
billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
"Black people are not a monolithic group, but what we are facing is something that's extreme — and that's poverty, that's homelessness, that's higher rates of joblessness, that's law enforcement invading our communities day in and day out — and we are uprising. And so this Black Spring is about really talking about a national uprising. And we should shoud be honored to talk about this moment.'
http://www.breitb...r-spike/

Socialists use lack of money as an excuse for violence to acquire more power.


You neglected to finish your last sentence, "more power and money". That is human nature, nothing new there. By the way, didn't the wealthy and powerful use violence and threats of violence to exploit minorities for centuries to increase their own wealth and power? It is a two sided coin.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
As for the Indians, well it is their life and the life of their children. Look at the bright side it is not your money, it is Bill Gate's. And isn't disease a natural way of controlling population growth? Isn't that better than abortions in your eyes?


Money didn't buy power did it?

the problem is one of infrastructure and access -


No.
When Bill Gates buys them a toilet and installs it in their homes, people still refuse to us it.

It's their culture.
Money can't buy the power to change it.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
@greenonions,... As you throw around your childish "racism" insults like an adolescent.

Just because one makes reference to facts about Indians (not a race btw) or blacks, does not of itself mean they're racist. It appears that you're making charges of "racism" to escape rational and substantive debate,.... typical of a liberal.
Vietvet
3 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
@greenonions,... As you throw around your childish "racism" insults like an adolescent.

Just because one makes reference to facts about Indians (not a race btw) or blacks, does not of itself mean they're racist. It appears that you're making charges of "racism" to escape rational and substantive debate,.... typical of a liberal.


@nou

Are you comfortable with ryggys recent use of "Japs"?
billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
Quote Rygg2: "When Bill Gates buys them a toilet and installs it in their homes, people still refuse to us it.

It's their culture.
Money can't buy the power to change it."

Believe me it will!

Where are you getting your information about toilet use in India? You quote one person and apply that to all poor Indians without sanitary toilets. Seems to me they must be planning to make a lot of progress from the quote below.

http://timesofind...3719.cms
"Gates said Modi wants to end open defecation by 2019 and discussed installing toilets in bus and rail stations in the country's 500 biggest towns."

Apparently it has greatly influenced the government of India, now that is the POWER of CHANGE.

Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
You should be thanking me for providing an escape route from the substance of my post.


We should be thanking you for commenting like an adolescent?


Yes, because now you can obfuscate the original point made by focusing on irrelevancies, like my manners (in jest btw),.... as you are doing with your fraudulent charges of racism to rygg2. Typical liberal tactic.

Liberalism operates counter to nature, while free market capitalists take advantage of it.


a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard


Liberalism used to mean "for liberty" which is what I advocate. The term has been hi-jacked in the USA. When I say liberal, I mean modern Progressive Liberals which seeks big gov solutions to non-problems, as pointed out above.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
It's their culture.


Ryggy - I am not denying that their is a major problem in parts of rural India - regarding access to - and use of sanitation. What I am saying is that there is no need to bring that topic up - other than to once again display your hateful racism.

It was asserted that money was more powerful than violence.
The money from one of the richest men in the world, Gates, is powerless to coerce Indians to use indoor toilets.
This example destroys the assertion that money IS power, AND since you cried 'racism', again, it demonstrates the 'racism' inherent in the Indian caste system.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
@greenonions,... As you throw around your childish "racism" insults like an adolescent.

Just because one makes reference to facts about Indians (not a race btw) or blacks, does not of itself mean they're racist. It appears that you're making charges of "racism" to escape rational and substantive debate,.... typical of a liberal.


@nou

Are you comfortable with ryggys recent use of "Japs"?


Yes perfectly, ... faux racial ultra-sensitivity is more divisive than any actual racism that may exist.

"Japs" is short for Japanese,... not a race.

@greenonions,... racism is the belief that one race of people is intrinsically worse in some capacity, than another, which is to say, by nature. This has nothing to do with pointing out defects of culture. There are races that have different cultures. Now, quote Rygges2 making a racist comment by this proper standard and I may change my mind.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
President Obama's African heritage - despite it being totally off topic.


If greenie voted for Obama it was not because Obama supported limited govt, which greenie claims to support, and Obama doesn't.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015

" The struggle between communism and Western Civilization, he wrote, is a conflict of faiths and visions between those who believe in God and those who believe in man without God. He memorably described the communist vision as:
{Sounds like most atheists who post on this site:}
the vision of man's mind displacing God as the creative intelligence of the world. It is the vision of man's liberated mind, by the sole force of its rational intelligence, redirecting man's destiny and reorganizing man's life and the world. It is the vision of man, once more the central figure of the Creation, not because God made man in His image, but because man's mind makes him the most intelligent of the animals."
http://www.realcl...9-2.html
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
Noumenon
typical of a liberal.


Typical of lazy thinker. And you are supposed to a philosopher or something?

I notice that you duck the substantive issue of defining liberalism - so that we might have an understanding of how you are using the term.


I answered your question already.

How can one respond to your [political points]- if we don't know the base you are speaking from?

You should already know the meaning of "liberal" in its negative connotation in the context provided, if you're in a position of giving a reasoned response. Are you from Europe?
billpress11
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2015
Quote Rygg2: "It was asserted that money was more powerful than violence.
The money from one of the richest men in the world, Gates, is powerless to coerce Indians to use indoor toilets.
This example destroys the assertion that money IS power, AND since you cried 'racism', again, it demonstrates the 'racism' inherent in the Indian caste system."

Again what is your SOURCE that the Indians are NOT using the toilets. My previous post shows that even the most POWERFUL person in India is behind the Gates Foundation goals. Now that is power. Money and power go hand in hand.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
Noumenon
Typical liberal tactic.


Typical lazy thinker. For what it is worth Noumenon - I advocate a minimalist government system. So your childish labels are meaningless - and belie a very lazy penchant on your part. Go away.


My labels have established meaning in political philosophy, though as I pointed out, the term 'liberal' has been hi-jacked by progressives.

http://www.studen...eliefs/, is a contrast between traditional liberals and conservatives. I mean "liberal progressive" in my rants. I'm more of a libertarian actually. More confusion for you?
Vietvet
3 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
@greenonions,... As you throw around your childish "racism" insults like an adolescent.

Just because one makes reference to facts about Indians (not a race btw) or blacks, does not of itself mean they're racist. It appears that you're making charges of "racism" to escape rational and substantive debate,.... typical of a liberal.


@nou

Are you comfortable with ryggys recent use of "Japs"?


Yes perfectly, ... faux racial ultra-sensitivity is more divisive than any actual racism that may exist.

"Japs" is short for Japanese,... not a race.

"Japs" is a derogatory term, in popular vernacular it is racist.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
@greenonions,... As you throw around your childish "racism" insults like an adolescent.

Just because one makes reference to facts about Indians (not a race btw) or blacks, does not of itself mean they're racist. It appears that you're making charges of "racism" to escape rational and substantive debate,.... typical of a liberal.


@nou

Are you comfortable with ryggys recent use of "Japs"?


Yes perfectly, ... faux racial ultra-sensitivity is more divisive than any actual racism that may exist.

"Japs" is short for Japanese,... not a race.


"Japs" is a derogatory term, in popular vernacular it is racist.


Depends on context of it's use,... i.e. does the given context imply inferiority.

I'm not debating that racial ultra-sensitivity exists such that one would feign offense,... only that such offense is vacuous, as nothing wrt intrinsic nature is implied by that word.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
That the charge of "racism" is used as a political weapon by the left, does not itself mean there is actual racism being exposed. To democrats, it's not the facts that matter, as much as does the severity of the charge.
Noumenon
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015
You keep using the term liberal - when responding to my posts. As I pointed out - based on your definition - I am most certainly not a liberal.

I don't recall refering to you as a liberal. I did say you used typical tactics of a liberal, charging racism at the drop of a hat.

So your name calling is just childish - and does not have some fancy political/philosophical meaning

It's [proper] original meaning was expressed clearly by Locke, Hobbes, J.S. Mill, etc. I would be a liberal by that standard. Today, however, in the USA and my country Canada, at least, the 'liberal progressive' does not stand for liberty per se, as they tend to advocate big gov and social engineering.
Vietvet
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015


"Japs" is a derogatory term, in popular vernacular it is racist.


"Depends on context of it's use,... i.e. does the given context imply inferiority."

"I'm not debating that racial ultra-sensitivity exists such that one would feign offense,... only that such offense is vacuous, as nothing wrt intrinsic nature is implied by that word.

The only context I've ever heard "Japs" used was in the bullying my Nisei best friend endured in grammar school and the insults thrown at my Sansei girlfriend. "Japs" has only one context and it is always negative.

Of coarse you are probably offended that someone of European ancestry has had a relationship with an "Oriental "or whose late son had a maternal grandmother who was Shoshone.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
hat is your SOURCE that the Indians are NOT using the toilets.


"Rameshwar Natholi complains about the size of the pit for the unused new toilet in his front yard in Mukhrai village in India's Uttar Pradesh state. "The pit is too small; it will fill up quickly. I don't want the bother of cleaning it up frequently," he says. (Rama Lakshmi/The Washington Post)"
https://www.washi...ory.html

http://www.bloomb...use-them

http://www.bbc.co...29502603
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
"The Progressive economists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries saw social science not merely as a means of inquiry and understanding but as a guide to social management and control. The advent and broad acceptance of Darwinism in the late nineteenth century, combined with a more general belief in the power of science and scientific management to solve social problems, led to a fascination with eugenics and the possibility of using public policy to ensure the "survival of the fittest" and the purity and strength of the human race. "
"various Progressives and socialists who were not economists, such as Eugene Debs and Beatrice and Sidney Webb, also supported minimum wage laws and other interventions into the labor market precisely because they would weed out those who were deemed too stupid or lazy to compete in a market economy—in particular, women, immigrants, and blacks."
http://fee.org/fr...ineering
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2015


"The moral of the story is that, despite the modern left's continued claim that the pro-market philosophy is racist, sexist, and xenophobic, history demonstrates that classical liberals/libertarians were proponents of equality and opponents of racism, and that those who viewed the races as unequal were likely to seek backing from the State, particularly in labor markets. The historical record of the left on these counts is much more mixed than it is willing to acknowledge."
http://fee.org/fr...ineering
Noumenon
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
Of coarse you are probably offended that someone of European ancestry has had a relationship with an "Oriental "or whose late son had a maternal grandmother who was Shoshone.


Why would I be offended by that? Is it not as morally bankrupt to arbitrarily and without justification, imply one would be offended by such things, as it is to be actually offended by such things? Are they not both bigotry?

I don't recall refering to you as a liberal


You can't even remember what you said yourself - or take the time to go back and check.

"It appears that you're making charges of "racism" to escape rational and substantive debate,.... typical of a liberal. - Noumenon"


Let me ask you a question, and I'll expect an answer. Why did you not include the full quote?

Here it is again,....

"I don't recall refering to you as a liberal. I did say you used typical tactics of a liberal, charging racism at the drop of a hat." - Noumenon
Noumenon
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
Ryggy
The moral of the story is that, despite the modern left's


Enough with your stupid deflection. You are the one exhibiting racism on a public forum. Now shut up.


I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your charge of racism. You come off as a bit of a fraud.

Keep in mind that racism is the belief that one race of people is intrinsically inferior in some capacity, than another, which is to say, by their nature. Also, keep in mind that criticizing a culture is not equivalent to criticizing a race. Further, that not all racial statements are racist statements ... though all racist statements are racial statements.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
Has greenie admitted to voting for BHO twice, yet?
If so, he is either lying about supporting limited govt or a racist.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
'Indians' will not use toilets


Hygiene habits are interesting. My grandmother didn't get a flush toilet until they moved to town in 1965. Her outhouse was always spotless, whitewashed and never smell with the lime she used.

Reading stories about the US POWs in Vietnam suggests their toilets were not very hygienic.

China is not known for its clean public restrooms, yet Japan is very clean. Filipinos are also quite hygienic with their manual bidet technique.

I haven't been to much of Europe but what I saw in Finland, Norway and Sweden and Leningrad were quite clean.

As noted in the articles about India, the issue is one of culture.

Singapore solved its toilet problems, caused by so many cultures with poor hygiene habits with violence, aka punishment, fines, jail, caning,...

I recall a comment from a visitor to the Taj Mahal. It was nice, but take care to avoid stepping on the cow and human feces all over the place.
billpress11
5 / 5 (2) Aug 03, 2015
Rygg2, change takes time, but give them time they will change. The quote from the link below is just some of the reasons.

Quote from link: http://www.bloomb...use-them
Workers Shunned
"About 800,000 Indians worked as feces removers in 2008, often carrying excrement in baskets on their heads, an occupation that causes them to be excluded from parts of society.
For women, heading to the fields alone raises the risk of assault, a danger that gained international attention in May when two girls from the village of Badaun in Uttar Pradesh were raped and hanged from a mango tree after they went to defecate outdoors."
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Aug 03, 2015
Has greenie admitted to voting for BHO twice, yet?


More distraction Ryggy - my voting record is of course none of your business - and whether I support limited government is also not the issue here. I support a minimalist government - but that is of course a very subjective term. I recognize a role for government in issues like health/safety/environmental regulation. We disagree on that subject - but not important. I certainly do not fit Noumenon's definition of a liberal.

So he voted for BHO because he is half black. Racist.
Stevepidge
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
The real problem we have as a society is that we're unable to separate productive from unproductive work.


That is not society's problem.

only "services" which serve no real purpose.


If someone is willing to pay, it serves the buyer's purpose. That's all that matters.

the Chinese market is actually free-er


If the Chinese only steal their ideas from others, they will never learn or reward innovation and will never be innovative.
Nikola Tesla was not rewarded at home for his ideas, but was rewarded in the USA to the benefit of Tesla and the USA.

Tesla.. rewarded?? The man died penniless. The WORLD benefited mightily from that noble man, the oligarchs took everything he had, and what was left the govt stole after his death.
Noumenon
1 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2015
I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your charge of racism.


I already told you Noumenon - Ryggy has a long history of inserting race into threads - at times when there is no basis for making the thread about race.


If he has such a history then it shouldn't be difficult for you to substantiate your charge of racism. I'm still waiting....

-Racial statements do not equate to racist statements. Not all racial statements are racist statements ... though all racist statements are racial statements.

-Racism is the belief that one race of people is intrinsically inferior in some capacity, than another, which is to say, by their nature.

-Critiquing a culture is not the sane as making racist statements.

More distraction Ryggy

You're vacuous and irrational charges of racism are your effort at distraction.
Noumenon
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
Much of what is charged as "racism" is either the above three points, or simply natural reactions or consequences of facts. There are natural consequences to being a minority in a society,... but the left claim "institutionalized racism" fraudulently.

Also, one having a natural reaction to facts or experience even if bigoted, is not itself racism....

"There is nothing more painful to me … than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved." - Jesse Jackson

Whites are also entitled to the same natural reaction,... but not according to the left.

The democrats use the Charge-Of-Racism ® as a political weapon and in the process, dilute the severity of racism. This is to disrespect those who have actually suffered from it. The invented and politicized identity-ultra-sensitivity is also far more divisive in our culture than the effects from actual existing racists.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2015
the oligarchs took everything he had,

Tesla spent it away.
He used the wealth he earned from Westinghouse to live high on the hog in Manhattan.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2015
So he voted for BHO because he is half black. Racist.


Wow - you can be quite a jerk....


It's logic.

Assuming, 1) you are a US citizen (you claim to be from UK; 2) your claim for limited govt is true;
Conclusion: You could only vote for Obama for the color of his skin and not the content of his character as Obama is a socialist, like his father.
Of course you could be lying about the part of not being a 'liberal'/socialist, too. Or maybe just confused?
Noumenon
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
Sounds logical to me. I had asked greenonions if he was from Europe so that I could understand his confusion of what a liberal (profressive) in negative connotation was.
bluehigh
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
Critiquing a culture is not the sane (sic) as making racist statements.


It is in Australia (and I expect in other jurisdictions).

In particular the controversial Section 18C
The Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (the RDA) makes it against the law to treat you unfairly because of your race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin ...

http://www.austli...18c.html

Notably, the publication of Charlie Hebdo cartoons, so fervently supported as permissible 'free speech' would likely have been a criminal offence in Australia.

Je Suis Charlie? Non.

bluehigh
not rated yet Aug 04, 2015
Jeremy Clarkson (formerly of Top Gear) ... Mexicans are feckless comment if uttered in Oz would likely be unlawful.

Infamously a well known (in Oz) media personality, Alan Jones, was convicted for breaching the act by suggesting ... I better not say 'cause my tin foil hat might leak.

There's more but I'll piss off now.
bluehigh
not rated yet Aug 04, 2015
How can anyone be 'half black'?

That's a racist statement.

Half white?

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
How can anyone be 'half black'?


The US govt would classify Obama's father as black, from Kenya.
The US govt would label Obama's mother as white.

It is logical to call someone a racist - because they voted for President Obama - because he is half black?


If you voted for Obama for the color of his skin and not the content of his character, it's racist. And if you were hoping for a change in race relations, you got it. Blacks are now worse off than before Obama was elected.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
Why does the US govt even ask?

"The Census Bureau has embarked on a years-long research project intended to improve the accuracy and reliability of its race and ethnicity data. A problem is that a growing percentage of Americans don't select a race category provided on the form: As many as 6.2% of census respondents selected only "some other race" in the 2010 census, the vast majority of whom were Hispanic.

Six percent may seem small, but for an agency trying to capture the entire U.S. population (nearly 309 million in 2010) every 10 years, that number results in millions of people unaccounted for. "
http://www.pewres...hnicity/
Noumenon
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
Sounds logical to me.


It is logical to call someone a racist - because they voted for President Obama - because he is half black?


That was not the only condition outlined. You either have a reading comprehension issue or you deliberately leave out vital points made.

I will concede this point, even though you failed to make the distinction; Even if one voted for Obama based on his race,.. it is not a racist act,... but rather a racial act. Clearly Rygges2 was being sarcastic given your knee-jerk charges of racism in this thread.

@bluehigh,... The Racial Discrimination Act applies to discrimination, not to Critiquing of a culture,... for otherwise anyone who uses racial statistical demographic facts would be racist, which of course is not the case unless they use those facts to make a case for intrinsic inferiority.

Obama has a white mother so it is valid and non-racist to say he his "half-black".

Divisive ultra-sensitivity.
Noumenon
3 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2015
The reason free speech has to be protected, is not on account of mild and agreeable speech, but rather on account of controversial and offensive speech.

Liberals don't believe in liberty (hence they hi-jacked that term),... even to the extent of granting gov the powers of thought police. To maintain freedom is a constant battle with the far left.
Noumenon
not rated yet Aug 04, 2015
Jeremy Clarkson (formerly of Top Gear) ... Mexicans are feckless comment if uttered in Oz would likely be unlawful.


A country who has allowed it's government to degenerate to the point of not protecting free speech is a country of feckless people.
Noumenon
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
Incidentally Jeremy Clarkson, May, and Hammond, just signed a deal worth $250 million with Amazon Prime. Clarkson had previously sold Top Gear to BBC-2 for $40 million, but was stuck as a presenter. I'm sure his firing was entirely orchestrated. In any case, his free speech and humour will be appreciated in the proper non-liberal market place.
bluehigh
not rated yet Aug 04, 2015
.. it is not a racist act,... but rather a racial act.


Yes indeed. Good to see the clarification.

Divisive ultra-sensitivity? Not really. Sure it's valid to say he is 'half black'. My thought is why it's preferred over 'half white'? Petty perhaps or not.

Anyway, good to read your points of view but it's a bit of a hot potato and way off topic. Not unusual here! Way past my bedtime for a cold wintery Tuesday night.

bluehigh
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
Yep, I look forward to a bit more Jeremy Clarkson and co. I expect he's not too concerned with wealth inequality! If I can somehow get Amazon Prime in Oz.
Noumenon
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
@greenonions,

The conditions were as follows,...

IF ..... greenonions is from the USA, ....AND .... greenonions desires a limited form of government, .....AND ..... yet greenonions voted for Obama ....THEN .... greenonions voted for Obama for [racial]* reasons or was confused,....

...this logically follows from the two implied axioms, a) limited government is not compatible with the ideology of Obama. b) Obama would be the first black president.

QED

* I already stated I don't agree it would be racist,.. only racial.

Your racism is in tossing around charges of racism without careful and considered thought, when none has been expressed in this thread. By doing so you dilute that charge to meaninglessness and thus disrespect those who have actually been effected by it.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2015
I already stated I don't agree it would be racist,.. only racial.


I say it is racist.

"rac·ism
(rā′sĭz′əm)
n.
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race."

Those who voted for BHO because of the color of his skin and not the content of his character were racist by (2) above.
If they voted for BHO because of the content of his character they are socialists.
If they voted for BHO because of the content of his character AND the color of his skin they are socialists.
Noumenon
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race."

Those who voted for BHO because of the color of his skin and not the content of his character were racist by (2) above.


But since they voted for him on the basis of being the first black president only, they were not in fact prejudging him at all in terms of ability.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2015
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race."

Those who voted for BHO because of the color of his skin and not the content of his character were racist by (2) above.


But since they voted for him on the basis of being the first black president only, they were not in fact prejudging him at all in terms of ability.


They were discriminating based upon race.

Is that not why the Nobel committee awarded a prize to someone who started a war in Libya and is helping Iran develop nuclear weapons?
Noumenon
not rated yet Aug 04, 2015
They were discriminating based upon race.


That is true,...racial discrimination,... but the motivation was not a racist prejudice against, say a white candidate.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2015
They were discriminating based upon race.


That is true,...racial discrimination,... but the motivation was not a racist prejudice against, say a white candidate.


Who knows what motivated the discrimination?

We see now the among some, black lives matter more than all other lives (unless the black life is an unborn baby). http://www.lifene...-babies/
denglish
1 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2015
I voted for President Obama - that makes me a racist - because he is half black?

If you voted for him based on his qualifications, then that is even worse.

At least the racists that voted for him felt a certain degree of ideological fervor.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2015
From another racist Brit:

"Kelly Osbourne ask Donald Trump who would clean your toilets if Latinos leave. ouch. "
https://www.youtu...PLN1kFws
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2015
who has done a good job as president.

And you say you are not a 'liberal'/socialist.
Noumenon
2 / 5 (4) Aug 04, 2015
You have lots of insults to offer greenonions. The conditions that I listed had an IF/THAN statement. Please reread. If you were truly for limited gov, would you sacrifice that principle merely on account of abortion rights? Is murdering babies that important to you?
Noumenon
not rated yet Aug 04, 2015
I had made it clear that I don't agree with rygges2 that it would make you a racist,...
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2015
Voting for a candidate who conflicts with some of your values


BHO is NOT for limited govt.

So why does greenie think the lawless BHO is a good president? It can't be for his policies to limit the power of the state.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2015
This is likely why greenie likes BHO:

""President Obama has openly defied [rule of law] by repeatedly suspending, delaying, and waiving portions of the laws that he is charged to enforce. When President Obama disagreed with federal immigration laws, he instructed the Justice Department to cease enforcing the laws. He did the same thing with federal welfare law, drug laws, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act," Cruz wrote. "In the more than two centuries of our nation's history, there is simply no precedent for the White House wantonly ignoring federal law and asking others to do the same."
http://rightwingn...n-obama/

Science worshiping atheists like greenie are typical 'liberals' who know what's best for everyone and will support lawless acts 'for the benefit of humanity'.
And this is why socialism fails, every time, because it depends upon perfect, selfless dictators and followers.
sfarrar
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2015
There is no income inequality. Obama promised to abolish it and has done so.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Aug 05, 2015
Is this racist?

"Nearly 400 Sick from Mexican Cilantro Contaminated by Human Feces"
"U.S. and Mexican health authorities investigated 11 farms and packing houses in Puebla and discovered human feces and toilet paper in fields and found that some of the farms had no running water or toilet facilities,"
http://www.breitb...n-feces/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
I don't know

So it's racist to you if I post about how one of the richest men in the world can't use his wealth to get Indians to use indoor toilets, falsifying the assertion that money = power.

So to you, racism is subjective, not objective?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
Greenie is so concerned about racism, yet likes BHO?

"One great irony of the current presidency is that Barack Obama won the support of so many seasoned political journalists—not to mention otherwise-skeptical voters—who thought that a black president would improve racial unity. David Remnick of the New Yorker called him "the bridge." Time magazine's Joe Klein assured readers that Mr. Obama, who "transcends the racial divide so effortlessly," would help America turn the page on race. But six years in, that hasn't happened."
http://www.wsj.co...38730963
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
"But the real racists and colonialists are these people – who want Latinos in the United States, and Eastern and Southern Europeans in the United Kingdom – so that they don't have to clean the toilets. It's racial, ethnic, and nationalistic short-term opportunism. And it's about to bite some countries right in the arsch."
http://www.breitb...rgument/
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
All of the major black leaders like Sharpton Jackson and Farrakhan earn their living by being racist. They are the last people who want to see black society integrate with the rest of the nation. Racial strife is their tool just like a carpenter uses a hammer and a saw!
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
Onions here in the US we have a huge ghetto crime problem. You can move into an integrated neighborhood just a few miles away in the same town and live in safety. Note, both areas have the same government and the same police force but one suffers from "Police Brutality" and the other doesn't. Tell me why is that?
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
I think that the black basketball player Charles Barkley said it best " Bad stuff happens when you resist arrest."!!!!!

The courts and not the streets are the place to determine if you have been treated unfairly by the police.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
Have you wondered what it might feel like - living in a poor, neglected, dangerous neighborhood?

Poor neighborhoods are not inherently dangerous.
Neglected by whom? The 'liberal' mayors?
More shootings in a black neighborhood in Boson leads to more calls for gun buybacks instead of people in those neighborhoods standing up to gangs by testifying.
People get the govt they deserve.
Eikka
5 / 5 (3) Aug 05, 2015
Just admit you've pirated (stole) a bunch of stuff off the web and you're trying to justify it.


If I had, would that constitute a counter-argument or just an appeal to motive fallacy?

"Intellectual property" is a nonsensical concept. Ideas cannot be property, otherwise you must argue that one can "own" a number. Information itself is not corporeal, therefore it cannot be held as property. If you claim otherwise, just try to put the gap between your fingers into a box and deposit it in a safe.

Intellectual labor - the creation of ideas - is valuable and tradeable, but the ideas themselves are not, because once created they cannot be destroyed and do not need to be made anew.

In fact, if an idea has any inherent value, it has less value the less people know and use it.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (3) Aug 05, 2015
@Erikka

So you agree to the necessity of copyrights to protect the creators of content.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Aug 05, 2015
"Which leads me to wonder about people who believe that "poverty causes crime."

When people say this, there are only two possibilities. One is that, on some level of consciousness, they think that if they were poor, they would commit violent crimes. My hunch is that this is often the case. Just as the whites who say all whites are racist are obviously speaking about themselves, those who claim that poverty leads to violence may well be speaking about themselves, too."
http://www.dennis...s-crime/
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Aug 05, 2015
"The other possibility is that they are not speaking about themselves, in which case they would have to admit that poor Americans who rob, rape or murder are morally inferior to themselves.

Which, of course, happens to be true. People (of any income level) who rob, rape and murder do so because they lack a functioning conscience and moral self-control. It is not material poverty that causes violent crime, but poor character. But the "poverty causes crime" advocates refuse to acknowledge this because such an acknowledgment blames criminals — rather than American society — for poor peoples' violent crimes.

And that they won't admit. Because once they do, they will have begun the journey toward affirming conservatism and Judeo-Christian values, both of which are rooted in the belief that values, not economics, determine moral behavior."
http://www.dennis...s-crime/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2015
Ferguson, MO is a classic example of how crime: riots, arson, etc. cause poverty by driving away those who need the state to protect their property.
We are now seeing how crime is causing poverty in NYC as the 'liberal' mayor enables more crime and productive people leave taking jobs with them.

The state slows its prosecution of crime. Illegal organized crime moves in and finally legal organized crime, 'liberals' take over and bankrupt cities like Detroit.
Eikka
4 / 5 (4) Aug 06, 2015
So you agree to the necessity of copyrights to protect the creators of content.

Not in the least.

I find it highly unethical that the creators of content - or rather the owners of the copyright, which is most often not the same thing - would attempt to cash in on the creations by selling copy by copy over and over again, because it's basically an attempt at hiding information from the public in order to gain more compensation for the work than is reasonably warranted.

I've used the example before, where a man comes to shovel your driveway clean of snow, then stalks every member of the family and every visitor individually and demands to get paid by each because he now "owns" the intellectual property of a clean driveway, since the other people aren't aware that the man has already negotiated and recieved a payment for the work from you.

In any other line of business, the methods of "copyright" would be considered a fraud.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (5) Aug 06, 2015
@Erikka

Your argument lacks ethical and economic sense. Do you really expect content providers to work for free? Do you work for nothing or do you just want the work of others for free?

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
I wonder if the UK has indoctrinated their subjects in racism to the point they fear being called racist and are quick to accuse others of racism.
Maybe that's why the UK authorities and subjects turned a blind eye to the rape and molestation of their teenage girls by Pakistani Muslim men.
They so feared being called racist by the Muslim lobby they sacrificed their daughters to them.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
Ideas cannot be property

Sure they can.
Processes and procedures for fabrication and secret recipes are ideas that are protected as private property.

well documented CORRELATION between poverty and crime.

Yes. Crime causes poverty, but 'liberals' can't admit to this.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 06, 2015
""I am extremely troubled but sadly not shocked at the exceedingly broad scope and fundamentally racist nature of the unconstitutional police conduct at Homan Square that the Guardian's most recent study documents," said Flint Taylor, who played a major role in pressuring Emanuel and the city to create a reparations fund for victims of police torture."
http://www.thegua...detained
This happened and is happening under Obama's watch.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
This facility actually started under President Bush


Obama was a state legislator in IL, from Chicago.

institutionalized racism

That's how Jesse Jackson made his fortune, blackmailing businesses.

Too bad for those girls in UK who were raped because of UK's institutionalized racism, refusing to prosecute crimes based on race.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
I have met Jesse Jackson.

I am not surprised.
Are you suggesting that black people cannot be racist?

You seem to think so.

you still have not made a point

BHO must not have cared about helping his fellows when he was in a position to do so.
Either he didn't care or didn't want to know or was complicit.
For whatever reason, BHO was a poor community organizer and state legislator for not ratting this out in his own political party. Chicago is controlled by 'liberals'.
gkam
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 06, 2015
We are just beating this topic to death. Let the Libertarians go find a Libertarian government, where they can live together in pure joy. Of course, since zoning laws are socialistic, your house may have a smelter next door, and a foundry on the other side, as I have seen in some states.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 06, 2015
says nothing about the problem of institutionalized racism

Sure it does.
It demonstrates that race hucksters are not really interested in resolving the issue.
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 06, 2015
When the problem of racism is brought up do we see anyone besides the Blacks and a small minority of Hispanics complaining that they are being discriminated against. NO!!!!

In fact, many Hispanics have started their own businesses and are quite the entrepreneurs.
Do you see many Asians or Middle Easterners complaining about discrimination. NO!!!

The Asians just study and get grants to develop new science in the US.

Sorry, this is a cultural problem and not a racial problem!
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Aug 06, 2015
In fact Millenniums and Generation Z are convinced that their problems were created by anyone but themselves. They really feel that they should be remunerated for Tweeting from their mothers basements about the size of the various Kardashian's asses.
MR166
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 06, 2015
"Of course there are no black people who start their own business."

Yea Onions, if Dr. Ben Carson ever managed to get the nomination and run for president the black leaders would be calling him an Uncle Tom because of his conservative proclivities. Just like Justice Clarence Thomas was dragged through the mud so will he be.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
In fact, many Hispanics have started their own businesses and are quite the entrepreneurs.
Do you see many Asians or Middle Easterners complaining about discrimination. NO!!!


Recall how blacks resent the Koreans who open convenience stores in their neighborhoods and destroyed many Korean businesses in South Central LA.

But then in Ferguson, they destroyed all businesses. Even ones owned by blacks. And thousands of people from around the country helped rebuild some of those businesses with grants of cash.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
black leaders would be calling him an Uncle Tom


Or like Condoleezza Rice or Carol Swain from Vanderbilt.
gkam
2 / 5 (4) Aug 06, 2015
We can eat the rich, and start over.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
One of the challenges for blacks, or anyone, who was kidnapped from their culture, enslaved, and then freed is they have lost their culture and need to create a new one.
For many, especially blacks, have clung to their faith in Christ and their local churches to create a new culture.
Yet there are those atheists like greenie who attack religion and would gladly destroy the religious culture of the descendants of slaves.
Black churches have been leaders in promoting a positive culture in spite of faux leaders like Sharpton and Jackson who attack that culture and promote dependency.
Atheists like greenie are racist for attacking the faith of all, and especially blacks who have created that culture with positive results.
MR166
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 06, 2015
Onions you just have to look at the cultures that have succeeded in the US. They all value EDUCATION, FAMILY AND HARD WORK as the key to success in the US. Their leaders do not blame others for failure. Other cultures think that success is based on milking the system for as much as possible and complaining when it does not meet their expectations. Gee I am unmarried have 2 children, no job and live in poverty, the system must be rigged against me.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 07, 2015
"As a new report from the National Black Chamber of Commerce explains, "EPA is proposing new regulations … to reduce CO2 emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants. [T]he impacts on low-income groups, Blacks, and Hispanics would be especially severe." The study estimates job losses reaching 7 million for blacks and 12 million for Hispanics, with the poverty rate increasing by more than 23 percent for blacks and 26 percent for Hispanics."
http://dailycalle...spanics/

And greenie supports Obama's Regulatory State that will harm blacks and Hispanics.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 07, 2015
Atheists like greenie are racist for attacking the faith of all


I am a racist for attacking religion. You are beyond stupid.


Yes, when religion is central to the culture of some minorities.

es there are nasty people out there - who will attack people because of their color -

And greenie is one of them.
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Aug 07, 2015
"You are decrying the practice of making assumptions about black republican candidates"

I never said they made assumptions, I said that the would call him names despite his obvious success. Instead of viewing him as a black role model the black leaders that have the most access to the media will call him a traitor to the black cause just as the did with Clarence Thomas. This will solely be based on his political views and his willingness to integrate into and uphold the values of traditional US culture. These "Leaders" obtain their power by encouraging divisiveness and mistrust.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 07, 2015
These "Leaders" obtain their power by encouraging divisiveness and mistrust.


Greenie should read the works of Thomas Sowell on culture.

"Do we as individuals and as a nation wish that others less fortunate had our blessings? We should and we do. But our blessings as a nation did not consist of having other nations give us foreign aid. The blessings of individuals who have achieved in life have seldom taken the form of having others accept mediocre performances from them or make excuses for their counterproductive behavior.
Almost as mushy as the quest for cosmic justice is the notion that the alternative is to "do nothing" about the gross disparities in prospects that are common around the world. There has never been a moment in the entire history of the United States when we have done nothing. There are innumerable things that still need to be done, but spreading confusion is not one of them."
http://www.tsowel...ecu.html
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 07, 2015
The US was known as "The Great Melting Pot". This adaption of a common culture including language, by new immigrants, served to unite the country. Yes, everyone should celebrate their culture and history, but it is also necessary for everyone hold common values to insure unity. By it's very definition a melting pot enables every culture to contribute to the common culture. Separatist movements have done great harm to many in this nation.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 07, 2015
The US was known as "The Great Melting Pot".


So was the British Islands. Even though the islands were invaded, many times, the cultures, and geography, lent themselves to adapting new and better ways.
The US was an extension of what started in Britannia.
And we now see what happens when that culture stagnates or encounters cultures that refuse to adapt.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 08, 2015
RR
Yes, when religion is central to the culture of some minorities.
RR is now on record as alleging that atheists are racist - because "religion is central to the culture of some minorities." You are too stupid for words.


Defend your attacks on the religious culture of minorities and how your attacks help them.

The religious blacks in Charleston, SC didn't riot after 9 blacks were executed in their church by a white perp who liked the stars and bars.
Blacks rioted in Baltimore when a black man died while being transported to jail by black and white police.
Greenie prefers riots?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 08, 2015
Those racist Brits!

"Sir Paul Collier, an Oxford professor who advises the Department for International Development, said that migrants from poorer countries are bring their "dysfunctional cultures to developed countries" and called for them to retain links with their own countries so it would be easier for them to return home."
http://www.breitb...untries/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 08, 2015
I believe that religion is force for great evil in our world


And I know atheists socialists like your ARE evil as demonstrated by Stalin, Mao, Pot and Planned Parenthood.

a critic of religion


You are not just a critic. You are an irrational advocate of evangelical atheism.

understanding of colonial oppression


It's interesting how those who were 'colonially' oppressed are mostly basket cases fighting amongst each other. Especially those colonized by Spain and France.
But I agree, colonization not appropriate, but de-conlonization was handled poorly and created more chaos.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 08, 2015
Atheism is however not a force for evil -


Sure it is.
You attack a force for good in the world. A force that as enable YOU to have the liberty to claim to be an atheist.
Martin Luther King was a Christian minister who led a civil rights movement and was supported by millions of other Christians. (Who was the atheist MLK? But I digress.)
Attacking MLK's faith is racist as it was his inspiration for civil rights.
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 08, 2015
Onions virtually every society in history has believed in a god or gods. If you believe in Darwin's theory of evolution and the survival of the fittest you might even conclude that a belief in god gives man an evolutionary advantage.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 08, 2015
nstitutionalized racism in America.


Such as Affirmative Action, forced school busing, and businesses forced to report the race and gender of their employees to the state?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 08, 2015
Onions virtually every society in history has believed in a god or gods. If you believe in Darwin's theory of evolution and the survival of the fittest you might even conclude that a belief in god gives man an evolutionary advantage.


People like greenie believe they are better, smarter than those who have faith in God. Especially minorities.
They have faith only in science.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 09, 2015
I am an equal opportunity critic -

But not on AGWism, atheists or socialism.
Religions you follow.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 09, 2015
76% of people in sweden.

The state religion of Sweden is Lutheran and its culture permeates Scandinavian society in Scandinavia and in the USA.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 09, 2015
How about this institutional racism?

"When the crowd asked the activists to allow Sanders to speak, one activist called the crowd "white supremacist liberals," according to event participants."
http://www.breitb...ffstage/
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Aug 09, 2015
"Appearing as a guest on Friday's Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield, liberal CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill slammed GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson as having "racial amnesia and racial blindness" for not taking a left-wing, divisive view on race in Thursday night's Republican debate, as Hill accused the Republican base of being "race deniers."

The CNN commentator also sounded like he may have been hinting that Republicans "hate" black Americans as he bizarrely charged that GOPers "hate certain people and love" Dr. Carson. - See more at: http://newsbuster...Jgo.dpuf
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 09, 2015
Great post Rygg. Dr. Ben is not even leading in the poles and they are starting to Uncle Tom him.
How dare a black man have an independent viewpoint!!!!!!
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 09, 2015
RR
The state religion of Sweden is Lutheran


But 76% of their population claim to be atheist, or non religious - which is the point I was making.


Their centuries of Lutheran culture just vanishes?
MR166
not rated yet Aug 10, 2015
"You cannot follow a simple thread. MR made a comment " virtually every society in history has believed in a god or gods."

Onions don't quote just 1/2 of an idea and then question it's validity. The second part of the idea stated that there must be some sort of evolutionary advantage associated with a belief in god.
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 10, 2015
As an example of this advantage, suicide rates are higher among atheists.
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 10, 2015
"However - there is a much stronger link between belief in god, and murdering large numbers of people through suicide bombing. Give me someone who kills themself, over someone who kills large groups of other people - any day of the week."

Like Russia and China murdering 100 million people eh!
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 10, 2015
Anywho, it is almost impossible to tell what part of the Muslim war on Muslims is political and what part is religious.
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Aug 10, 2015
Onions read your silly post "However - there is a much stronger link between belief in god, and murdering large numbers of people through suicide bombing. Give me someone who kills themself, over someone who kills large groups of other people - any day of the week."

I never claimed atheists killed people just that the biggest murderers did not act because of their belief in god.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 10, 2015
They did not murder in the name of atheism.


"Atheism is a natural and inseparable part of Marxism, of the theory and practice of scientific Socialism. "
Lenin
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 10, 2015
"(1) Atheism is an integral part of Marxism. Consequently a classconscious Marxist party must carry on propaganda in favour of
atheism.
(2) The demand for the complete separation of the church and
the state, and the church and the school, must be made.
(3) The winning over of the proletariat is accomplished, principally by dealing with their everyday economic and political interests; consequently the propaganda in favour of atheism must grow
out of, and be carefully related to, the defence of these interests.
(4) The final emancipation of the toiling masses from religion will
occur only after the proletarian revolution, only in a Communist
society. This, however, is not a reason for postponing the propaganda for atheism. "

"That is why we say that to us there is no such thing as a morality
that stands outside human society; that is a fraud. To us morality
is subordinated to the interests of the proletariat's class struggle"
Lenin
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 10, 2015
Thanks for that Rygg, you are really quite knowledgeable on many subjects.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 10, 2015
" A sense of connection to a being larger than oneself was associated with better physical function and fewer, or less severe, symptoms of cancer or treatment, according to patient reports.

Intrinsic religious belief was also tied to better physical function."
http://news.yahoo...920.html
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 11, 2015
"Hugo Chávez daughter is the richest individual in Venezuela, report claims (Yay Socialismo!)"
http://www.agains...ialismo/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 11, 2015
So you quote Lennin - to suggest that Stalin murdered in the name of atheism


Lenin: Communism <==> atheism.
Stalin: a communist
Communist 'morals': whatever one needs to do to promote communism/atheism: lie, murder, starve, lie to cover up for murder (NYT) ...
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 11, 2015
many throughout history have killed in the name of god


Millions more have died in the name of scientific socialism.

There was no catchy phrase used by the atheist, socialist murders as there were too many to murder at one time.
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Aug 11, 2015
My favorite South Park episode is about the Atheist War (https://www.youtu...Cya52c). This pretty much sums up the religious war issue.
MR166
3 / 5 (2) Aug 11, 2015
For those of you who have not seen the entire episode, three atheist groups go to war over which group represents "True Atheism".
MR166
1 / 5 (2) Aug 11, 2015
"Perhaps they are making fun of religion. Perhaps they are making fun of peoples need to fight over stupid shit. Why do you feel this is an important issue to raise here?"

Onions, sorry if you feel that I am making fun of your religion called Atheism. NOT!
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2015
communists who are not atheist?

Impossible according to Lenin.

Did you know there are Christians who don't want to murder atheists and start wars?

You cannot stop the tide of time


Jews and Christians have been attacked and murdered for their faith for thousands of years, yet they are still around and growing. Especially in Africa.
Atheists have a Blind Spot biasing their 'science' of socialism.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2015
Lenin is the final arbiter of reality

He is an expert on communism and atheism.

absence of belief

No.
You do not believe God exists and no one can use science to support that belief.
Just as no one can use science to support their belief in God.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2015
do not believe in things for which there is no evidence.


Yes, you do.

https://edge.org/...prove-it
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2015
We (atheists in general) do not believe in things for which there is no evidence.


Yes, YOU atheists DO.

Here is the EVIDENCE that atheists believe something they cannot prove:

https://edge.org/...prove-it
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2015
Onions look, war, killing and aggression has nothing to do with god or the lack there of!!!!

Evolution has built conflict into our DNA. It seems that there is a fine balance between aggression, killing everyone except yourself and pacifism which results in dying because someone ate all of your food.

Religion and or ethics have evolved to make our day to day life more pleasant.

MR166
not rated yet Aug 12, 2015
Yea Onions, God, that is why the N. American Indians were waring with each other way before white man ever stepped foot on the continent.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 13, 2015
No I don't -

Then don't speak for ALL atheists.

we place a lot of issue in the box of "not yet known"

Which is why science was started. To explore and better know God's creation in order to better know God.

where did I ever say that there was no other reason for war?

Here:

History is filled with bloody wars - all in the name of one god or another.


No wars have been fought in the name of atheism.

Yes, WWII. Fascist against the communists.
Mao's revolution.
USSR cold war.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 13, 2015
I don't - and never have.


Yes, you did:

" We (atheists in general) do not believe in things for which there is no evidence."

Please show me a war that was fought in the name of atheism.


WWII, Mao's revolution, Killing Fields, ...Cold War,
MR166
2 / 5 (4) Aug 13, 2015
Ryggs Onion's beliefs are exactly those of any other religious fanatic. Even if the world was totally atheist there would be just as much fighting and just as many wars. It is always about power and control of what belongs to others.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 13, 2015
Do you notice the words 'in general' - which are put there to inform you that others may have a different interpretation.


You spoke for more than just yourself. 'We....'

were not fought in the name of atheism.


They were fought to stop the imposition of atheism/communism/socialism and to allow every individual to decide for themselves what to believe, as long as long as those beliefs don't include the use of force to impose those beliefs upon others.

Evangelical atheists are quite willing and eager to use the power of the state to impose their beliefs upon others.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 14, 2015
I have no interest in imposing my beliefs on others

But your fellow atheists do.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Aug 14, 2015
But your fellow atheists do.


Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. Let each take responsibility for their own words, and behavior. I think a good principle for you to ponder.


Really?
Then why are atheist organizations trying to use state violence to prohibit the practice of religion?
Aren't these fellow travelers your pals?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.