How does it feel to be poor?

If teh rich were not there to throw you in the field and then give you money for your work, where would you be?

(answer: in the field, growing food so you can survive since you have no job)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You are going in circles.
Providing jobs and creating jobs are exactly the problem.
Do you even know how to read?

You obviously have a seriously skewed understanding of the true intent of crappytalism and the utter stupidity of creating work out of thin air.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Do you not know how to read?

REPEAT: IT IS CLEAR YOU HAVE READ NOTHING, AND THEREFORE BABBLE CONSISTENTLY ABOUT ITEMS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED, RESPONDED TO, AND CLOSED.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Free under true First World standards.

It is clear you are a totally brainwashed slave. You plow the fields for the rich to get richer. You are a vacuum cleaner for the rich.

Crappytalism does not work. Crappytalism = Global destruction. It is disfunctional, and a totally primitive backwards ignorant form of economics. Crappytalists live in the age of complete stupidity.

 

By the way, I am rich.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

LOL! Uhh, me too!!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

That doesn't make any sense.

 

Real parasitic rich never announce such things on a public forum, appears uber desperate.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I was being serious actually, my dad created his own company from the ground up and became very wealthy and I did the same.

 

Please explain how creating jobs is a problem

 

Creating jobs could be pimping 5 year old girls. That's a problem. Creating jobs could be paying a dime per hour and forcing your workers to live in on- site shanties, like the old days of super capitalism. Creating jobs could mean you liquidated a company that pays good wages and you 'created ' jobs in Bangladesh for slave wages. Creating jobs could mean you are ADDING good paying jobs in America with good benefits and job security, but I know that can't be right. Your question is so subjective it's impossible to explore well.

 

WTF!
It has already been explained over and over clear as day.

Do you not know what logic is?

 

Well, even if the workers are getting paid a dime and hour to work, the job obviously benefits them because why would they take it otehrwise? nobody is forcing them. A dime an hour may be bad to you but it makes a bangladesh worker more than happy. Geez I thought you liberals were all about helping others and not worrying about your own selfish wants! And since the company has a lower labor cost, it can now sell its products at a lower price, and that helps you the consumer.

 

A captive impoverished population is what you really want then isn't it? As long as a pool of slave labor is available the barons can threaten better paid workers or simply dump them for eager masses in countries drowning in poverty.

Liberal? How many fucking times do I have to point out I am as far from liberal as you can get. I support a Marxist Leninist state. We would not tolerate bourgeoius champagne liberals.

 

Capitalism relies on poverty and human degradation. It can't exist without exploiting the most vulnerable. If the system runs out of fodder in one country it moves to another. After driving down our standard of living long enough through union busting and moving jobs overseas they now have Americans to exploit. By breaking the law the profiteers bring in illegal immigrants. That's their system, as they did the same to Europeans and Asians throughout US history. Without poverty and human suffering capitalism just cannot function. Communism looks to move the wealth to bring standards above 3rd World levels and eliminate the robber baron and his economic rapists.

 

The rich do not help anybody.
Capitalism relies on desperation. If there is no desperation, there is no incentive for the individual to work. Ergo, the rich manipulate monetary system and the economy in order to ensure people are deprived.
This is not only destructive, primitive, and unethical, it is completely mornic, and done for one and only one purpose. To keep the rich richer and the poor poorer.

It is not beneficial to the economy as a whole as it lowers the standard of living. It is the reason the standard of living is so low.

 

Capitalism relies solely upon personal property and trade. You own materials, you make something with them, and you trade the product with someone else.

Now you may state that capitalism ignores poverty, human degradation, and desperation. You may say that capitalism invites abuse or allows imbalances of power that cause these things. But to say that capitalism relies on these things merely demonstrates ignorance.

The truth is that the problems tend to lie in the governance and implementation, not in the economic system. It's just as easy to demonstrate these things in socialistic and communistic systems as it is in capitalistic. And in any case, there is no nation that operates exclusively by one economic system, they're all various combinations most are a combination of capitalism and socialism. The differences lie primarily in the legal structures regarding to ownership, taxation, distribution, prohibitions, etc.

~Raithere

 

LET US REPEAT:
WE HAVE THE MEANS, RESOURCES, AND CAPACITY TO PROVIDE ALL INDIVIDUALS WITH A TRUE FIRST WORLD STANDARD OF LIVING.

There is only one thing, and one thing only that is stopping us. TEEMING AMOUNTS OF UTTERLY INCOMPETENT RICH PEOPLE.

 

Would you please learn to read.

I did not say that you said "capitalism ignores poverty".

Now try reading it again and not posting anything until you understand it.

~Raithere

 

Here is the point.
Freedom is what it is supposedly all about.
Capitalism + Decomcracy = Freedom.

Unfortunately, the results are:
Capitalism + Democracy = Slavery.

The system relies heavily on desperation. If nobody was desperate, the system would collapse. That is because it is a desperation based system which is the exact opposite of the affluence based system.