By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
osamanobama said:
fordy said:

Your argument fails on the basis that if those centres were abolished, you believe there would be equal treatment. However, wealth classification will always mean that ones growing up in a rich family will always have a leg-up. If you believe in equality, tell me, do you support a 100% death tax? (that is, all accumulated wealth in one's life can not be inherited). 

This is the basis of capitalism. It's based on greed. Wealth can be obtained in two ways, by making more than others, or forcing others to make less. the American right-wing uses both of these methodsto ensure the wealthy stay wealthy and thus have the control.

i believe people can do with their own property what ever they please, if that means giving their money to their heirs then so be it.

for the second part, you do realize wallstreet gave more to obama than Mccain, right?

and for the bolded, the former way is capitalism, the latter way is socialism.

Your whole "equality" agenda bullshit is pure hypocrisy. So tell me, if you're for equality, why do you support people inheriting large sums of money and effectively having a leg-up against the rest? Not exactly equality, is it? Oh that's right, you're only for equality when it suits you.

Yes, Wall Street gave plenty to Obama and he's been the best conservative president in modern times. Funny how that works.

Correction, socialism is the equal distribution of all wealth. Capitalism stamps the poor down further in order to raise the value of the dollar. After all, there have to be classes that do the dirty work, right? You conservatives claim "everyone can be rich if they want to", but you realise what that ideology would lead to? Extreme inflation, and the dollar becoming worth less. Thereby, the wealthy like to keep their little collective group small in able to keep the value of their wealth high.