A quick word on blocking ads
It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
THEPROPHETHow does giving everyone the chance at an education going to destroy capitalism? If anything it will allow it to thrive by having more people able to contribute to it rather than live off of it.
College creates more business men/women.
Not everyone has smart, successful parents. Check your privilege whitey.
Squirrel_MurphyBeing brainwashed to think that going to school and getting a degree is where this country has failed. It doesn't guarantee anything. And no, college does not necessarily create more business people. ENTREPRENEURS CREATE JOBS. All jobs are traced back to entrepreneurs 100%. Even government jobs, they need money from taxes to operate and taxes come from businesses and their employees.
THEPROPHETSo the consensus is that affordable college is a bad idea because we don't need college.
KravtZThis newest generation of brainwashed morons (As a whole) especially the Bernie Sander's supporter types. Want to see where democratic socialist systems work? Look at france, puerto rico, s.america countries...IT DOESN'T.
dbchililol
ignores: Canada, Norway, Sweden, UK, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Australia, New Zealand
buy no coincidence the "happiest" countries in the world
Mr.BishopI don't disagree that they would want to leave, but I would point out to you that unless they want to move to africa or some other war-torn country... they're going to be going somewhere they pay a shit load more taxes. Even if Bernie wins in the states, basically any other first world country has high taxes and social support systems.
KravtZall countries that are much much smaller population than the US with vastly different economies and world influence.
theBearJewbut my father was not. He worked his ass off, sacrificed the pleasures of life that some people feel entitled to so that I could live a better life for than he did. I am thankful for that almost every day. And you better believe that I want to work that hard so I can give my kids a better life than I have today.
KravtZall countries that are much much smaller population than the US with vastly different economies and world influence.
dbchilisorry solid point
puerto rico is a much better proxy for the US than of of the countries i listed
Granite_StateOh and the failures you listed arent of the same size? Lol. Kinda hypocritical, denies calling successful "socialist" countries successful because they are smaller than the US and have "different" economies, yet references failed "socialist" countries like Puerto Rico, France, and "the south american countries" which also are much smaller than the US and have different economies. All this tells me is you really dont have shit for a valid argument.
KravtZNever said they weren't successful. Just said they are vastly different than the US. It could never work here.
KravtZNever said they weren't successful. Just said they are vastly different than the US. It could never work here.
jmellberg800Ben Franklin once said "When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic."
nothing in this world is free, promising free college to people still costs someone money down the road. and your gonna pay it in taxes. unless you just want to take it from the 1%. which is not fair and violates everything this country was based on. the 1% of rich people made their money through capitalism, you can to. you think everyone of those people were born rich? someone in their family decided to quit bitching and asking for free handouts amd did the work themselves: not to say everone who wants free college is lazy but some are, and the rest are just in need of money. and that sucks for them. but you know what? life isnt fair and when people try to even out the playing field through free college and other government aid, it starts to turn into comunism. I will agree the idea of comunism is grand. but it has never worked and it will never work. it fails to take into account human greed. everyone has it and it can not be removed from society. so the only alternative is capitalism.
VinnieFJust to be clear, capitalism is not a form of government like communism.
jmellberg800nothing in this world is free, promising free college to people still costs someone money down the road. and your gonna pay it in taxes. unless you just want to take it from the 1%. which is not fair and violates everything this country was based on. the 1% of rich people made their money through capitalism, you can to. you think everyone of those people were born rich? someone in their family decided to quit bitching and asking for free handouts amd did the work themselves: not to say everone who wants free college is lazy but some are, and the rest are just in need of money. and that sucks for them. but you know what? life isnt fair and when people try to even out the playing field through free college and other government aid, it starts to turn into comunism. I will agree the idea of comunism is grand. but it has never worked and it will never work. it fails to take into account human greed. everyone has it and it can not be removed from society. so the only alternative is capitalism.
onenerdykidThe point is, we already pay it in taxes, we just spend the money on other things like an idiotic jet or foreign wars. The money is there, it is the allocation that needs re-prioritizing. It doesn't need to come from the 1%.
VinnieFmuch easier to do in your father's generation than today. In 1980 16% of the population in the US had a bachelor's degree or higher. Today it's ~ 30%. While this may not matter for the low income jobs anyways, it certainly makes a huge difference if you want to break into that upper middle class. Today practically all of the well paying jobs are nearly impossible to get without a degree or without being connected (ie being rich in the first place). So even if you're spending 10k a year on your education (which I understand to be very little in the US), then today the average person will have to spend 40k more early in life to get the opportunity for a high paying job while this wasn't practically a prerequisite in your father's generation.
.MASSHOLE.Out of curiosity, a little off basis here, but do you have to pay taxes in both Austria and the US? I know US citizens abroad have to (at least in the UK) unless they renounce citizenship.
onenerdykidYes, but not a lot. I don't have any income in the states anymore, so it's pretty minimal. But the government is closely looking at expat bank accounts abroad (which I assume is more intended for catching rich people trying to hide money off shore or at suspected terrorist links).
BogsThe more people who have a college degree, the less valuable having a college degree becomes.
VinnieFIt seems to be quite trendy to hate on those who aren't enthralled with the idea of capitalism.
Just to make sure people are clear on this: countries like the US and Canada have lost more jobs to capitalist ideology than socialist. How many millions of jobs have been lost overseas simply so a manufacturing company can boost their profits by 5% so their executives can get their half million bonus and their shareholders smile wider?
And how much are we going to be paying in the future for the environmental damage and prohibitive costs of resources so that extraction companies can make as much money as they can possibly line their pockets with NOW? I mean let's not try and develop safer methods for shale gas extraction or to refine bitumen sands, let's get it all now now now! no time to wait I need my $10 million salary today so I can live off the backs of our future generations. $5 million isn't going to cut it.
The problem with capitalism is that the concept of 'future' doesn't seem to exist. It's all about today and now and maybe what the price of oil will be tomorrow.
THEPROPHETHistorically speaking the rich are getting taxed next to nothing.
THEPROPHETThis is also one of the worst arguments we hear over and over again.
You reduce a degree to nothing but a piece of paper. This isn't supply and demand. People aren't commodities...
A degree represents knowledge, structured and supported knowledge. If more citizens have a college education then the more educated our population is, how is this not really really obvious?
How does that not benefit the country, capitalism, and the economy?
You people have some serious issues with critical, holistic thought.
onenerdykidThe point is, we already pay it in taxes, we just spend the money on other things like an idiotic jet or foreign wars. The money is there, it is the allocation that needs re-prioritizing. It doesn't need to come from the 1%.
To say that the top 1% made their money through capitalism is not fully correct. They made it through a very privileged system that promotes the expansion of their wealth at the expense of middle and lower classes. The percentage of total income in America going to people who are in the top 1% has doubled over the past 30 years. It used to be 10% back in 1980 and in 2010 it was 20%. While this has being going on, the median and lower income families wealth declined by about 8%. This means that the richest 400 people in America have more money than the first 150 million combined. Every serious economist knows that this gross disparity in the distribution of wealth will lead to a huge problem.
What so many people clearly do not understand is that rich people still exist within a democratic socialist government/economy/framework. Do you think the CEO of Amer Sports is not insanely rich? Or the CEO of Volkswagen? Or Adidas? Seriously people, do I need to go on? Rich people flourish in a democratic socialist society, there is just less of a gap in the distribution of wealth. Over simplified example to demonstrate the point: instead of having 1 billionaire, you have 1,000 millionaires. I don't understand how some of you are not getting this.
jmellberg800your point of having 1000 millionaires is great, it would be great it that happened but how do you propose we redistribute the wealth? over taxing the wealthy people or straight taking it is extremely unfair not to mentiom unconstitutional. and any presidential candidate who says they will do this is basically promising the poor more money. and theres a lot more poor people than wealthy. basically a one way ticket to being president
CoreyTrevorIMO, the only thing that is going to prevent the wage gap from widening is catastrophic market collapse which will probably happen someday with the capitalist society.
onenerdykidOver simplified example to demonstrate the point: instead of having 1 billionaire, you have 1,000 millionaires. I don't understand how some of you are not getting this.
THEPROPHETThis is also one of the worst arguments we hear over and over again.
You reduce a degree to nothing but a piece of paper. This isn't supply and demand. People aren't commodities...
A degree represents knowledge, structured and supported knowledge. If more citizens have a college education then the more educated our population is, how is this not really really obvious?
How does that not benefit the country, capitalism, and the economy?
You people have some serious issues with critical, holistic thought.
onenerdykidWell, the tax rate that Bernie would be proposing is no where near what their tax rate used to be. In the 1950s it was basically double Bernie's proposals.
A government can only get rid of a deficit when spending is cut and taxation is in place. Every economist agrees on this point. Therefore, you can only raise taxes on those who can afford to pay more taxes, hence the rich. The wealth that the rich own has doubled, while the wealth that the middle and lower classes has decreased. This is because there is a finite amount of money, it is not infinite. When the rich own more and more, the rest own less and less. Democratic socialist countries understand this and thus have less of a gap between the rich and the poor through taxes, programs, etc. I am not an economist, but I do see how other countries operate and simply take note of it.
As far as your last sentence is concerned, do you really think Bernie wants to appeal to poor people because he is interested in becoming President? Or do you think he wants to appeal to poor people in order to help them and being president is a way to achieve that? Given his track record over the last 30 years and his overly modest way of life, I am inclined to think the latter.
KravtZall countries that are much much smaller population than the US with vastly different economies and world influence.
S.J.WIgnores that arguably one of the best presidents in the history of the US. FDR, was a socialist democrat.
Check mate
S.J.WIgnores that arguably one of the best presidents in the history of the US. FDR, was a socialist democrat.
Check mate
CoreyTrevorBut why is it where VinnieF pointed out that a generation ago, 16% held a degree while now it's more like 30% yet the wage gap is increasing? IMO, the only thing that is going to prevent the wage gap from widening is catastrophic market collapse which will probably happen someday with the capitalist society. The only way to solve it is by taking away all the tax breaks we give the wealthy and large corporations that contribute heavily to politics. Handing out college degrees won't help
.MASSHOLE.Also had the benefit of WWII. This gave him the ability to use military spending to grow the economy while uniting the people behind a singular cause.
Comparing his terms to the current day and age is like comparing apples to oranges. You did not have the global economy that we do now.
jmellberg800His "track record"? He has been a senator for 25 years and has never passed a single bill. He was on welfare before he was a senator. He has literally accomplished nothing in his life/ career and people see him fit to run a country? Her hasnt done anything, hes all talk
Granite_StateOh did WWII last 16 years? This seems to be conservatives (not saying you) main argument is response to anything positively said about FDR's terms as POTUS. I mean we didnt enter the war until what, 7-8 years after FDR was elected for his first term?
Granite_StateHe was also Mayor of Burlington. The fact that you think being a senator means you accomplished nothing in life shows how mind-numbingly stupid you actually are. Please stop posting, for all out sakes.
jmellberg800So your saying since he was elected that means he accomplished some thing good? Your going to elect him as president for the sole reason that he was elected senator? He hasnt done anything with his 25 years of senator and you think hes a viable option?
jmellberg800So your saying since he was elected that means he accomplished some thing good? Your going to elect him as president for the sole reason that he was elected senator? He hasnt done anything with his 25 years of senator and you think hes a viable option?
Granite_StateClearly you dont know how the senate works. Also, you have to be elected senator so people had to like him for some reason as to elect him.
KravtZIt can be related to all of the dem run cities going bankrupt...chicago, detroit, etc.
jmellberg800So hes a like able person does that make him fit to run the country? You have to actually do somehjig for people to like you/ unlike you. If you can find one shred of legislature or anything significant that he actually got passed or any way he helped this country then I will shut up and leave this thread alone. Because to me saying "well he was elected a lot as a senator so he must be good" is not reason enough to have him as president.
