Democrats give Thinman the vapors.

because it is bad for you isn't a good enough reason?

"Most people are healthy, so why should we cure the sick?"

Sick people have TV now, just like the rest of us.

Its more like "how about we provide everyone with the medicine they need to get well, but leave the administration of it to themselves." If we provide all the necessary social services to everyone AND we pay for these using tax revenue then people only have themselves to blame if they don't take advantage of the publicly available goods and services.

No one wants to smell your repugnant spices bro. Take that **** on the arches, way out past the smokers.

Those growth rates are deeply affected by where you started and the opportunities you had early on. This isn't some utopian meritocracy we live in where everyone can get where they want to go as long as they work extra super hard and put their best foot forward.

I was thinking about this recently too, and I'm sure this phrasing sounds a little Pollyanna-ish, but I came up with: "Would you rather be extraordinarily wealthy and hire your own police force, or less wealthy and not need one, because there aren't any desperate poor trying to rob you?" Given the way crime correlates with poverty and lack of economic opportunity, and all that.

One other thing I was thinking about: inequality in America right now has gotten to such an absurd degree (plenty of info on this available), that we could probably pay for a lot of the public services we're thinking of with high marginal rates on really high levels of income or estates. Like, higher taxes for anyone making over 20M a year or for any portion of an estate valued over 100M. (Obviously, I pulled those numbers out of a hat, and I'm not sure how to do this practically-- I think very few want the government taking over a large company because its owner dies. It's an idea, not an implementation strategy.)

But I mean, on that latter point, six of the world's twelve wealthiest people according to today's Forbes list inherited their wealth. Lol @ being able to inherit your way onto that list.

And SMARTPHONES

Which has everything to do with confirming how lazy they are and what bad choices they make, and nothing to do with how affordable consumer electronics have gotten (or how necessary having a damn phone is).

That's okay, though, I heard one guy from Georgia grew up poor but everything is fine for him now so the system is perfect.

i don't give a **** what you do and don't want to smell.

USA#1

Gubmint needs to establish Dept of Bootstraps and start sending them out monthly in lieu of checks imo

Why is a smartphone "damn necessary"?

Our consumerism and superficial demands for pleasure is destroying the earth as well as exploiting the labor across the world.

how else will the poors access draft kings tho? It's not like they have high speed internet.

I said a phone is necessary, not a smartphone. Don't misquote me.

Should be pretty obvious why a phone is necessary if you have a job and/or kids.

We're just at the point where cell phones are so cheap that there's no real reason to prefer a land line unless you actively don't want to be reached when you're out of the house. (And if you're a working poor with kids who has to work long hours or multiple jobs, because that's the position we put our working poor in in America, you sure as hell need a phone where you can be reached in case of emergencies 24/7.)

There should be winners and losers in life. Our goal should be to allow people to play the game fairly and start with access to the tools that can lead to success. If we provide a fair system and some people fail miserably while others reach preposterous heights that is ok. There should be big winners and big losers. I just want us to unstack the deck by making sure people have access to education and basic necessities. If they don't take advantage of these or get unlucky then that's a personal problem.

Man, it's one thing for this to be a thing you're okay with but for this to be your goal of what life should be is really sad.

People are truly suffering. Millions of people. And not the suffering that it was for you growing up not rich. They're like really suffering man. And to you that's just them losing the game and it's fair.

But it's unfair to tax multi billionaires a little bit more. Wtf happened to you dude?

Yep, if everyone has access to good healthcare, education, transportation, job opportunity, food then who cares if some Walton scion inherits 40B.

The child care question is interesting because nobody ever asks the simple question "Why is it that over the last 30-35 years that women have had to enter the workforce in droves because their husbands weren't making enough?"

Why is it that a regular working class job can't provide the basic needs anymore and women are being forced to enter the workforce?

What happened? The answer is extremely nuanced and complex with a wide range of factors responsible for the decline, but if society had an open dialogue about this then it would go a long way towards restoring the strength of the middle class.

Globalization, inefficiently run industries, bad monetary policy are the main culprits that come to mind. Some of it is societal/cultural too obviously, people are pretty bad with money on average...

taxing the rich more is going to do nothing to ease the burden on the working poor. we have to implement specific social services to lighten that burden. I have always been in favor of that and it is a decision that does not need to be accompanied by disproportionate taxes on the rich.

Quick, load the empathy program!

FILE_NOT_FOUND

Seriously, for whatever BEEP BOOP ROBOT jokes we've made about CDL, I never thought he'd come out and explicitly say his worldview is about devaluing human life. That's just ****ed-up and sad.

Especially since he has no problem with those "winners and losers" being determined by things like race, inheritance, country of birth, etc.

What specific services and how do you propose paying for it?

I think what he is trying to say is that competition makes everyone win in the long-term.

He said a few pages back that he thinks social programs should be strengthened significantly, so it isn't like he is just advocating survival of the fittest, hunger games style and everyone just go F themselves if they can't measure up.

this is why we need to fix the education system. you are a grown adult and cant read.

I want to provide a standard of living that allows everyone to have decent shelter, decent tasting and healthy food, good childcare, good schools, access to good state sponsored healthcare, access to reliable and efficient transportation, and several other things. I want all of these to be basic social services that are available to all people, even those with no income, at no cost. I want to pay for this through taxes. Most of these taxes will come from the rich. However, I do not want to tax the rich at a higher rate. Everyone will have their basic needs met. There would be no reason for people to be homeless or kids to not have people around to take care of them or anyone to go hungry or not get sufficient medical treatment. You pretend like I want people to suffer when I have stated time and time again that that is not the case.

Also GL significantly taxing people making 8 figures and above more when you have a global economy.

This isn't the 1950s when half the world is decimated post WW2. If you try to tax capital too much, it is just going to flow to another country.

The other thing thing that's flawed with his theory is that if we're gonna full blown "it's all in the game", then you can't have a problem with a group of people voting in politicians who legally pass legislation that helps them and hurts others. A Bernie Sanders movement is one of those tools you're allowing them to have in your game.

But you don't really mean it's all in the game. You mean it's all in the game as long as me, my friends, and the class I aspire to be in not only perpetually win, but run up the score and make them like it regardless of how much they're suffering.

After all, they have smart phones.