Philosophy Now Forum

.



"The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time. And we will address it,"
~ Bernie Sanders ~



.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:"The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time."
~ Bernie Sanders ~

Moral issue? -- Bullshit!
Economic issue? -- Bullshit!
Political issue? -- Yes, but that's bullshit, too!

????
It is not an economic issue???
It is not a political issue???
One may argue that it is not a moral issue *. However, to say that it is not a political or economic issue is silly. I would call what you posted a silly argument but it is not even an argument.
* My contention is that those that create the wealth should be rewarded at least above survival wages. The wealth created by them should not be stolen from them by mere gamblers (Wall Street etc)

raw_thought wrote:????
It is not an economic issue???
It is not a political issue???
One may argue that it is not a moral issue *. However, to say that it is not a political or economic issue is silly. I would call what you posted a silly argument but it is not even an argument.
* My contention is that those that create the wealth should be rewarded at least above survival wages. The wealth created by them should not be stolen from them by mere gamblers (Wall Street etc)

I hate to say it, but your understanding of political economics may be more limited than Wiltrack's (just kidding since Wiltrack represents the platinum-iridium rod of stupidity). Actually, socialism is a silly argument that not only goes against human nature but has been empirically shown to be counterproductive in maximizing people's standard of living.

That was not a response to my post.
You may disagree with Sander's statements. However, to claim that he is not addressing political and economic issues is silly.

raw_thought wrote:That was not a response to my post.
You may disagree with Sander's statements. However, to claim that he is not addressing political and economic issues is silly.

Listen, my friend, when I say that his point of view is irrelevant to political and economic issues, what I am saying is that he doesn't make any political or economic sense at all. Just using political and economic terms does not make a political or economic argument. In the same way, a person can't claim to be discussing mathematics simply by using a few mathematical terms.

Perhaps you should actually make an argument.
Simply, saying that everyone is stupid and you are brilliant makes you unworthy of debating. Of course you may enjoy calling a person a poopy head and then they call you a poopy head........But most people think that is a waste of time.

.



Bernie Sanders: "Bad trade deals like the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership are a major reason for the collapse of the American middle class and the increase in wealth and income inequality in the United States."




.

.



Bernie Sanders calls for downward ‘transfer’ of wealth of top one percent "what we’re living in now is what I would call — what Pope Francis calls — a casino-type capitalism, which is out of control, where the people on top have lost any sense of responsibility for the rest of the society."





........................................................



.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:Bernie-sanders-calls-for-downward-transfer-of-wealth-of-top-one-percent/Bernie Sanders calls for downward ‘transfer’ of wealth of top one percent "what we’re living in now is what I would call — what Pope Francis calls — a casino-type capitalism, which is out of control, where the people on top have lost any sense of responsibility for the rest of the society."

A) The Pope should stay away from economics and stick to preaching, a subject he knows something about, and B) Bernie should stay away from both economics and preaching, subjects he knows nothing about.

bobevenson wrote:

Bill Wiltrack wrote:Bernie-sanders-calls-for-downward-transfer-of-wealth-of-top-one-percent/Bernie Sanders calls for downward ‘transfer’ of wealth of top one percent "what we’re living in now is what I would call — what Pope Francis calls — a casino-type capitalism, which is out of control, where the people on top have lost any sense of responsibility for the rest of the society."

A) The Pope should stay away from economics and stick to preaching, a subject he knows something about, and B) Bernie should stay away from both economics and preaching, subjects he knows nothing about.

No one knows anything about it, or everyone would be rich. Only idiots think they are experts on it.

bobevenson wrote:Obviously, neither of you knows anything about economics. 1+1=2 whether you live in Australia or the United States. Besides causing unemployment, minimum wage represents a misallocation of resources.

I must say, the man has a point. We should be supplementing income not raising it. It is the prerogative of anyone to accept a lower wage at will.

raw_thought wrote:Look at the big picture. Yes, some will lose their jobs but more will get jobs and more people will be lifted away from poverty.
Lose 3 jobs gain 5. Thats +2.
Most minimum wage jobs require skills. Those that will lose their jobs are the lowest skilled.

Hold your horses there, Cowboy. We don't need everyone to have extra jobs. I'll agree to the same number of jobs with fewer idiot bosses who make everyone less efficient, but more jobs just makes people have less free time.

I was not talking about one person gaining 2 jobs. I was talking about a ratio.In other words for every 3 jobs lost, 5 will be gained.

raw_thought wrote:I was not talking about one person gaining 2 jobs. I was talking about a ratio.In other words for every 3 jobs lost, 5 will be gained.

If you think raising the minimum wage increases employment, you're an economic fool!