Oh yeah?  You think you're so smart?  Well there's one ontological proof that you hadn't planned on!  Here it is:






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpfBRLJUJVM  - The Room (2003) Full Movie

Surely you meant to say, "Picture of Bertrand Russell with caption, and then Youtube link"

Right, you're not making anything.  You're just posting a Youtube link and calling it a day.

LOL!  2 Youtube links & an info-meme.  If that's the "information" that makes you think, then why are you using it as a substitute for thinking?  Oh...because you fear thought.  Never mind.

Exactly.  There is no real definition of poverty that applies to American citizens, but there will always be a "bottom 20%" no matter how well-off they are.  

They love power, they love dictators, and they love forcing people to do and say what they're told.  In other words, they hate freedom.  They fantasize about petty revenge against "the rich" or "the Jews" or "Larry from Pizza Hut who fired me for smoking weed on the clock, he's just a hater cause he's old."

One reason for their destructive policies is that well-adjusted people from functional families don't buy into that hatred so easily.  They know that their main demographic is whiny brats whose fathers didn't pay them enough attention, so they use the government's power to leave millions of children fatherless.

But that's mostly beside the point.  The main point is that socialism doesn't work.  

After the fiery explosion of the Hindenburg, people stopped smoking cigarettes while riding on huge hydrogen-filled balloons.  In fact, it kind of put them off the whole idea of hydrogen-filled balloons altogether.  But people can see the fiery explosions of China, North Korea, the USSR, East Germany - and they still want to go for another ride.  It's hard to understand, but some of them are obviously in it for the explosions.

So the person who uploaded the video is able to give references and even talk about his ideas?  Good thing the video isn't just a link telling you to go somewhere else, or you wouldn't know what to believe.

Not so fast.  Let's keep talking about "fair shares".

When a company loses money and/or goes out of business, what fair share do the employees have in that?  What does it cost them?  

As for Wal-Mart, I'm sure you don't really want to get into the details of how much the employees get paid and what they contribute to the company.  (Hint:  the employees keep more of the profits than the company keeps)

Sometimes nothing, but they still get paid.  Sometimes they lose the company millions of dollars.  But they still get paid.  Because the owners of the company are slaves to the employees.


Percentage of what?  Profits?  Most employees aren't paid a percentage of profits, because they still get paid even if the company loses money.

If workers were paid a percentage of profits, then they would end up owing the company money sometimes.  Is that what you want?  For poor people to work all year for a factory, and then get paid nothing but instead owe money to the factory? 



They're not being given anything, they're earning money.  They obviously agreed that it was fair, because it's the amount of money they agreed to work for. 

If the employees were paid a "fair share", then they would sometimes lose money.  But that involves reality, something you're not familiar with.

 

Wal-Mart employees all have the option to own stock.  Most of them sell it immediately.  They choose to stay poor, and that is part of having freedom. 

In fact, being "poor" in America is a lot like owning slaves - you get to sit around all day eating free food, while others are forced to do all the labor to provide for you. 



Youtube links are great for people who don't have anything of their own to say.  But as I just said, I don't watch Youtube videos and then come back to debate you as if you're the one who made those arguments.  If I wanted to watch that video and respond to it, I would just make my own video on Youtube, and then message boards would have no content except a series of Youtube links.

I don't watch Youtube videos. 

Actually I, did read, my other posts.

So you can't even answer "What are your problems" or "What do you want".  Instead you say "posts on the internet" are "everything". 

How many are there? 

The Marxist campaign started over 100 years ago, and it hasn't ended yet.  That's why there are so many "rich people (like Jews) are evil" posts, everywhere on the internet.

It's easy to blame all your problems on a small group of people, and stir up hatred based on the idea that getting rid of those people will solve all your problems.

But what are your problems, really?  What do you want?  Will you ever be satisfied with anything?  Of course not. 

By the way, why are you calling Obama a communist based on the one quote I mentioned?  Are you saying that Obama calls himself a communist?

By rewarding failure and thereby creating more of it.

Black families in the United States were the fastest-growing income class, until the 1960s when the Marxists decided to sabotage them with harmful government policies.

"You can have this free apartment - but only if you're a single mother.  Your husband has to leave the family if you and your kids want to stay here."

Guess what?  Offer it to enough people, and some of them will take you up on it.

The Socialist policies in our government actively worked to destroy families and keep people in cycles of generational poverty, dependent on the government and helpless.  Less husbands and fathers, more poverty and more prison sentences.



Which country would that be?  In the United States, about 50% of the population pays taxes.  The other half gets free money from the ones who pay taxes.  And the ones getting free money are the ones under the most government control with the least hope for a better future. 

If Capitalism has failed, it's only because Socialism took over a long time ago.  But don't point to Socialism and call it Capitalism. 

They get paid for what they generate.  


That's false.  The poor have been steadily getting richer for hundreds of years.  


Climate change, or Global Warming?  Which side are the deniers - the ones who deny that climate change existed before humans?

Which side are the evil Nazi Holocaust deniers - the ones who want to blame all the problems of the working man on a small segment of the population (Greedy Rich Jews, right)?  

Go on, tell us how a few evil people are stealing all our wealth.  Let's have a final solution!  

Like I said, your sick ideas have been tried before.  Every time a society gets rid of the rich, people end up risking their lives to escape and go somewhere that still has rich people.
 


Yes, we're all shackled with 72" TVs and new cars.  GIVE US FREE!

(Give us free expensive stuff, and then we'll call it slavery when we don't want to pay for it)



Technology. That's irrelevant and moot since we aren't time travelers.[/quote]

Oh, so quality of life is irrelevant.  Then how can we define poverty?  That's right, just point fingers and make up hateful rhetoric.

Have you no compassion?  Don't you care that the poor have been lifted out of all their problems?  They don't starve, they aren't consumed with disease and filth, they live lives of comfort and leisure, their children don't die.  No, you don't care.  You want to reverse that progress and send us all back into lives of misery.


By your stupid ideas.  Capitalism pushed us forward 1000 years, and Marxism has been chipping away at it.  Keep it up, maybe you'll eventually bring it all down and destroy society like you want.

How did you go from "he's a liar and a scammer and doesn't even carve wood" to "I can find similar pictures that aren't as good" ?

5 different fish?

BitLamborghini is more expensive.  Each coin represents the value of 1 Lamborghini.  It really makes more sense than Bitcoin, because just mining coins only produces coins.  But with BitGold or BitLamborghini, you can run computers for no reason and also pay the price of something very expensive, without actually getting what you pay for. 

Marxism, Communism, and Socialism have failed repeatedly, and have always hurt the poor and lowered the quality of life for everyone.  But despite repeated failures, they still succeed in spreading the same failed ideas on the internet.

For example, how could anyone believe that wealth comes from the poor?  How could any serious person believe that "the poor are getting poorer"? 

If a man has approximately $0.00 worth of assets, how could he get any poorer?  How is it that the quality of life for "the poor" in many nations is higher than the quality of life enjoyed by Kings and Queens throughout most of history?

In the United States, the poorest families have a higher life expectancy than the average member of royalty had, 200 years ago.  They also have more leisure and entertainment, TV, internet, cell phones, Playstations, heat in the winter and cold air in the summer, a different set of clean new clothes for every day of the week, and their choice of meat and fresh vegetables 3 times a day.  In the United States, the average "poor" person is not only well-fed, but actually obese.

But somehow people look at the wealth of our poor and say it must be changed.  They want to make our poor people live in the mud and die of terrible diseases.  Just like Obama said:  it doesn't matter if we actually help the poor, as long as we hurt the rich.  That's the main thing, so it will be "fair".

And congratulations, it's working.  All the progress that came from freedom is slowly being turned around, as we're allowed less freedom over our own money.  Socialist centralized control is reversing all those 200-year upward trends.