another question for right winngers

[EL CHICO ROJO]

when u walk on the streets and you see poverty and hopelessness how can you say capitialism works...................or is it some of you live in fenced off neiborhoods so you can hide from reality and not see the other side of capitialism
you must know that capitialism is the cause of this so why support it

[kickmydog32]

I think it's because they are heartless and greedy; only thinking about themselves, and casting a blind eye on all the poverty that their destruction has caused. i would be interested to see a right wing reply to that question though

[commiecrusader]

i think its probs cos they're self absorbed by their own materialism. or maybe they stave of guilt by donating 'just £2 a month' to some charity and think they're changing the world. i fucking hate those adverts. they should use the money to overthrow the governments not buy food from fucking huge corporations to postpone the inevitable difficulties faced in LEDCs. that would do some lasting good.

anyway back to the question. maybe they just have the view that all homeless people just cant be bothered to do anything and deserve it. also a supposed function of capitalism is that you get what you put in so they probably again just think that those people haven't worked/tried harder. plus the only exposure most rich people have to the poor is a few buskers and tramps in the highstreet. not really an accurate reflection of the numbers of poor people really.

[EL CHICO ROJO]

yo i see poor ppl everi day .shit seeing that an not feeling sympathy or a need for change .......wow thats cruel

[Capitalist Imperial]

Hey, I've given help to people in need on a myriad of occasions. I would say that most of the time, though, these individuals are where they are because of their choices, which usually involve drugs or alcohlol, not because they were indiscriminately forced into the margins by a heartless capitalist society.

The idea that those who live in capitalist nations are inherently greedy and selfish is an ignorant stereotype. The USA is home to more charities than any nation on earth, period.

Hey, lets not kid ourselves though. Sometimes I don't mind contributing to the dependency and futility of a homeless drug-addict. I consider it an investment on my part in keeping one more competitor out of the job market.

[EL CHICO ROJO]

oh of coarse how can i be so stupid!
stupid enought to think u capitialists care.got there themselves ,nice buh wait wat about homeless children ............i guess they chose that.i meen of coarse its thier choice .....my friends all want to persue a future as a begger.and charites dont work
they will never solve the whole problem they just let u not feel guilt cause u donated to this or that
it dont mean you helped shit so dont even give me that bull crap

[Pale Rider]

Originally posted by EL CHICO [email protected] 27 2004, 05:37 PM
when u walk on the streets and you see poverty and hopelessness how can you say capitialism works...................or is it some of you live in fenced off neiborhoods so you can hide from reality and not see the other side of capitialism
you must know that capitialism is the cause of this so why support it
One just has to realise that no matter how bad you "THINK" it is here, it is way better than in socialist / communist nations....people from the world over are lining up to get into this nation...tell me, which socialist nation are people lining up to get into?

[Commie Girl]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 27 2004, 12:39 PM
I would say that most of the time, though, these individuals are where they are because of their choices, which usually involve drugs or alcohlol, not because they were indiscriminately forced into the margins by a heartless capitalist society.



Your ignorance is showing, CI. Most people who are homeless are that way due to Mental Illness....

[Commie Girl]

Originally posted by Pale [email protected] 27 2004, 01:26 PM
One just has to realise that no matter how bad you "THINK" it is here, it is way better than in socialist / communist nations....people from the world over are lining up to get into this nation...tell me, which socialist nation are people lining up to get into?

Obviously you havent travelled much and people are not "lining up" to enter the U$...people dont need to line up to live in other nations, they just go!

You will not find street people/homeless people in Cuba, so what makes the U$ so great in your eyes?

Turn off Fox, pick up and book, and get educated!

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by Commie [email protected] 27 2004, 07:28 PM

Your ignorance is showing, CI. Most people who are homeless are that way due to Mental Illness....
How is my ignorance showing?

I made a claim, as did you. I see no proof of your claim, yet you are quick to espouse my ignornace, inherently assuming that your assertion is the correct one compared to mine.

Perhaps you should revisit you calling me "ignorant" until you can provide proof of your claim, which I imagine will be hard to document due to the lack of census information on the homeless.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by Commie [email protected] 27 2004, 07:30 PM

Obviously you havent travelled much and people are not "lining up" to enter the U$...people dont need to line up to live in other nations, they just go!

You will not find street people/homeless people in Cuba, so what makes the U$ so great in your eyes?

Turn off Fox, pick up and book, and get educated!

Obviously you havent travelled much and people are not "lining up" to enter the U$...people dont need to line up to live in other nations, they just go!

Not really, many nations have very restrictive citizenship policies. For example, I can't just go to Sweden, Germany, or China and apply for citizenship. And, to be quite frank, no orther nation is even close to as popular as the USA when it comes to immigration.


people are not "lining up" to enter the U$


Now we are talking ignorance. Even you own fellow commies won''t argue this. You've obviously never been to New York Harbor, The San Ysidro border, the US/Canadian border or the Miami coast, where your wornderfully contrent Cubans try to enter the US in makeshift rafts by the hundreds every day.



Turn off Fox, pick up and book, and get educated!

This coming from the girls who states: "people are not "lining up" to enter the U$"

LOL :lol:

[__ca va?]

One just has to realise that no matter how bad you "THINK" it is here, it is way better than in socialist / communist nations....people from the world over are lining up to get into this nation...tell me, which socialist nation are people lining up to get into?

I tell you why: because they still think that America is a land of endless possibilities like it was at the middle of the 20th century. But it&#39;s not&#33; But I don&#39;t want to judge this more, I&#39;m not American. I can only tell you I&#39;d never move to America&#33; I don&#39;t want to go somewhere I wouldn&#39;t be accepted, and would be harassed by immigration officers.. <_<


Hey, I&#39;ve given help to people in need on a myriad of occasions. I would say that most of the time, though, these individuals are where they are because of their choices, which usually involve drugs or alcohlol, not because they were indiscriminately forced into the margins by a heartless capitalist society.

And what about those who had a specific job in a specific industry, but the industry went bankrupt and these people were thrown out of their homes?

[The Sloth]

I would say that most of the time, though, these individuals are where they are because of their choices, which usually involve drugs or alcohlol, not because they were indiscriminately forced into the margins by a heartless capitalist society.

There are two things wrong with these statements.

First of all, it is true that sometimes individuals end up homeless due to poor choices. However, society makes the biggest contribution to the "poverty" of these "choices" -- thus, when you are pressured into a certain action due to external forces, it is not much of a "choice." I doubt teenagers and adults on Nostrand Avenue in Brooklyn act like gangsters, for example, because it is a willing and totally "unprejudiced" choice. Rather, I think it has something to do with, 1) poverty and other social conditions that cause certain anti-social behaviors, 2) glorification of the gangster in the media, 3) materialistic desires.

Second, how many homeless individuals do you know?

Personally, living in New York City, I&#39;ve had the pleasure (&#33;) of meeting and establishing some kind of relationship with some of these folks. One in particular comes to mind, his name is Dawn, which I met at a park in Manhattan. He was living with his girlfriend, and she attempted to control him, but upon his refusal to submit, she kicked him out. She got a hold of his car and some of his money, but he remained with nothing. He attempted to find employment, but couldn&#39;t. It was difficult to believe when after a month or so I saw him in front of the Virgin Megastore, still homeless, giving out flyers for his friend, thus not getting paid much. I remember having discussions with him on the Nation of Islam, the Black Panthers, etc. Very intelligent fellow. Sad.

Another one in particular, although he wasn&#39;t homeless at the time, was yet another black man (interesting...I&#39;ve met only a handful of white homeless folks...seems to me that they are mostly black...odd indeed&#33;&#33;&#33;) named D. I remember he was selling music cd&#39;s this April...I got to know him because we ended up talking about George Jackson, Assata Shakur and revolutionary politics. Had about a 40 minute conversation, and it was cold as fuck but nonetheless I remember that it was a good experience. Extremely intelligent fellow, previous occupation: drug dealer. "Why?" Simply because after searching and searching, he couldn&#39;t find any employment. Hmmmm. It seems as if many of the gangsters and/or drug dealers I know can&#39;t find decent employment. The inarticulate and ignorant folks I can understand not finding any jobs, but as for intelligent and skilled individuals turned gangsters due to society&#39;s conditions not finding any work is inexcusable.

Social conditions create problems.

I think this is the fact that most capitalists can&#39;t seem to come to terms with.


The idea that those who live in capitalist nations are inherently greedy and selfish is an ignorant stereotype. The USA is home to more charities than any nation on earth, period.

But surely you agree with the assertion that those living under a society that deems materialistic gains and related power as the primary route to respect and happiness is bound to create an army of folks that become slaves to the money that they will never have&#33;

And when you are a slave to wealth, won&#39;t it cause you to adopt certain mentalities, possibly feel worthless, too?

As for the United States being home to more charities than any other nation....well, who will disagree with this? A nation with this much money will have to be home to all of them charities.

And as for foreign aid, well...

Map & Graph: Economy: Economic Aid - Donor (per capita) (Top 20 Countries)

1. Luxembourg &#036;352.30 per person
2. Norway &#036;307.95 per person
3. Denmark &#036;302.72 per person
4. Netherlands &#036;216.71 per person
5. Sweden &#036;191.48 per person
6. Switzerland &#036;150.30 per person
7. France &#036;104.68 per person
8. United Kingdom &#036;74.88 per person
9. Belgium &#036;74.25 per person
10. Finland &#036;73.01 per person
11. Ireland &#036;72.11 per person
12. Japan &#036;71.53 per person
13. Germany &#036;67.96 per person
14. Austria &#036;50.07 per person
15. Australia &#036;45.30 per person
16. Canada &#036;40.36 per person
17. Spain &#036;33.07 per person
18. Portugal &#036;26.82 per person
19. New Zealand &#036;25.23 per person
20. United States &#036;23.76 per person

Source: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap

Interesting that the nation with the most power, influence and money (well, those three words are interchangable) by very, very far contributes, proportionally, about 15 times less than Luxembourg, the first country on this list.


Hey, lets not kid ourselves though. Sometimes I don&#39;t mind contributing to the dependency and futility of a homeless drug-addict. I consider it an investment on my part in keeping one more competitor out of the job market.

Yes, and no one is there to help him or her out of this futility.

And you become another one of this "factors" that keeps folks in this state.

Thank you.





And where is that fuck Professor Moneybags? That fool was supposed to reply to an old thread of mine but he just "forgot" that we had a heated debate going. I bet it was because of those prison and poverty statistics I provided after he asserted that, 1) non-whites are not the majority of those in prison, 2) non-whites are not the ones that commit the most crimes, 3) non-whites are not the ones that are affected by poverty and hostile social conditions the most.

It seems as if "poverty" is the common denominator here.



...But whatever, social conditions have nothing to do with crime or anything else. My whole post was just bullshit&#33;

[EL CHICO ROJO]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 27 2004, 05:09 PM



It seems as if "poverty" is the common denominator here.



exactly and sad especialy since i see it happening to the next genoration...mine
i see my friends go to illegal ways of making money
they are not evil people nor r they stupid
they are victims in part of ther surroundings and its sad
i see they way they are setting themselves up 4 a hard life .buh they need money and they can get it i cant convinse them to stop especialy since in some ways and to a lesser degree im going down the same path they are and i feel for now there is no way to stop it , in this culture we need to survive not live .if you live that life you can clearly see the need for the fall of capitialism..
capitialists love to sugar coat the struggle or mabey they never lived it.buh if they can live 1 day in the shoes of the poor when u gotta walk round worryin if ur going to get robed by ppl.who u cant even villify cause u understand y they r doing what they r doing then you may see the need for change..

[sparky44]

Guess what kids......poverty was around long before capitalism/imperialism. Pick up the bible and read it once in a while......Jesus said there will always be poor.....

And guess what.....if you have no skills don&#39;t expect to make what a professional makes. <_<

[1949]

Guess what kids......poverty was around long before capitalism/imperialism. Pick up the bible and read it once in a while......Jesus said there will always be poor.....
I don&#39;t think anyone here is blaming poverty exclusively on capitalism. Rather, they blame it on all economic systems based on exploitation, which includes slavery, feudalism, and capitalism. On the other hand, socialist countries, when not ravaged by war, didn&#39;t have poverty.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by EL CHICO [email protected] 27 2004, 11:31 PM
exactly and sad especialy since i see it happening to the next genoration...mine
i see my friends go to illegal ways of making money
they are not evil people nor r they stupid
they are victims in part of ther surroundings and its sad
i see they way they are setting themselves up 4 a hard life .buh they need money and they can get it i cant convinse them to stop especialy since in some ways and to a lesser degree im going down the same path they are and i feel for now there is no way to stop it , in this culture we need to survive not live .if you live that life you can clearly see the need for the fall of capitialism..
capitialists love to sugar coat the struggle or mabey they never lived it.buh if they can live 1 day in the shoes of the poor when u gotta walk round worryin if ur going to get robed by ppl.who u cant even villify cause u understand y they r doing what they r doing then you may see the need for change..
Instead of selling drugs they could go out and get a factory job like the rest of the real hard-working americans.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 10:49 AM
Instead of selling drugs they could go out and get a factory job like the rest of the real hard-working americans.
There are no fucking factory jobs, or any other employment, period&#33;

Look at EL CHICO ROJO&#39;s community -- multiple factories closed down, moving out of the ghettos, and now people live in them&#33; Should he knock at these new "housing projects" attempting to find out where the fucking factory owners ran off to? Or should he go to South America, where these jobs probably ended up?

There are plenty of individuals that look for jobs but cannot find them. I find this is especially true in black and hispanic neighborhoods. Get a clue -- the jobs have been moving out of the ghettos for the past twenty years. And as for people such as myself that don&#39;t live in any ghetto, I&#39;m still unemployed. What am I, a lazy bum or something?

[Y2A]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 28 2004, 02:12 PM
There are no fucking factory jobs, or any other employment, period&#33;

Look at EL CHICO ROJO&#39;s community -- multiple factories closed down, moving out of the ghettos, and now people live in them&#33; Should he knock at these new "housing projects" attempting to find out where the fucking factory owners ran off to? Or should he go to South America, where these jobs probably ended up?

There are plenty of individuals that look for jobs but cannot find them. I find this is especially true in black and hispanic neighborhoods. Get a clue -- the jobs have been moving out of the ghettos for the past twenty years. And as for people such as myself that don&#39;t live in any ghetto, I&#39;m still unemployed. What am I, a lazy bum or something?
My last job was working with illegals at a blind factory, last one before that working in an agency that took me to factories. The problem is that there are lazy bums aren&#39;t willing to work hard jobs for low wages. Yeah, that would leave them unable to by those sneakers and "bling bling" they so desire. So instead they go out and sell crack on the corner bringing down the entire community with them. And people like you defend them.

[gaf]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 27 2004, 06:39 PM
Hey, I&#39;ve given help to people in need on a myriad of occasions. I would say that most of the time, though, these individuals are where they are because of their choices, which usually involve drugs or alcohlol, not because they were indiscriminately forced into the margins by a heartless capitalist society.

The idea that those who live in capitalist nations are inherently greedy and selfish is an ignorant stereotype. The USA is home to more charities than any nation on earth, period.

Hey, lets not kid ourselves though. Sometimes I don&#39;t mind contributing to the dependency and futility of a homeless drug-addict. I consider it an investment on my part in keeping one more competitor out of the job market.
1rst t i could kill you
but i wont because i just don&#39;t want to be dirty from all those spatters(splashes)
and all people in street are not drugs addicts.merely people who had it hard
you are just a fuckin arrogant bastard and i won&#39; t wish you that. then you will understand what dirty is
people spitting on you is no choice.fuck you bastard.i&#39;m workin now and people like you i make burger from .fuck you.but you just don&#39; t realize yourself .they do.
and you will just be a colletaral damage .arrogant bastard
i&#39;m sure i will still get milk out of your nose
also for spineless democrate

[EL CHICO ROJO]

yo y2a guess wat THEY DUN SELL DRUGS y u think cvause we poor minorities we sell crack.i kno sum pot dealers but only a few most of my friends bootleg shit u asshole i sed illegal not drug dealing..y u automaticli think drugs .maby cause we r poor minorities ? IS THAT IT

[The Sloth]

The problem is that there are lazy bums aren&#39;t willing to work hard jobs for low wages.

And another problem is that there are no jobs in the first place.


Yeah, that would leave them unable to by those sneakers and "bling bling" they so desire.

You left yourself open to be trapped, here.

Why is this "bling bling" so desirable? Could it be because capitalism is a system whose inherent qualities force the lower-class to be slaves to wealth? Could it be that capitalism forces the individual to measure self-worth by material wealth, and respect by how "hard" (a.k.a. cut-throat) someone&#39;s personality is? Why else would individuals wear huge chains and own multiple houses, if not to make up for a lack of self-esteem? Regardless, money won&#39;t really get you that necessary fulfillment...however, we are indoctrinated into the belief that it will since all the "beautiful people" have it.


So instead they go out and sell crack on the corner bringing down the entire community with them. And people like you defend them.

Actually, I didn&#39;t defend anyone.

"One sack of blow keeps another brother below."

I don&#39;t deny the accuracy of that statement.

However, what I did do provide you reasons why others sell crack.

But you seem to think people do it "just for fun."

Last time I checked, Harlem males are 50% unemployed. That means 50% of blacks in a huge section of Manhattan are jobless, and the statistic could be even higher unless you plan on counting temporary and unstable jobs as "real" employment. Now, according to you, this means that blacks suffer some sort of inherent anti-work syndrome. So, you have two choices:

1) Blame it on the inherent racial tendencies of blacks, or
2) Blame it on the system.

If you choose number one, you&#39;re a racist. If your choice is two, the theory behind capitalism is reduced to a piece of shit impractical philosophy.

Either way, you&#39;re fucked.

"There ARE jobs in Harlem, there ARE, ARE, ARE jobs for everyyyyyone&#33;"

Bwahahaha, I have to laugh at this statement every time, no matter how earnest this stupid declaration is&#33;

[Y2A]

Originally posted by EL CHICO [email protected] 28 2004, 05:52 PM
y u automaticli think drugs .maby cause we r poor minorities ? IS THAT IT
:lol:

Anyone that knows me on this board will know how incredibly ridiculous that sounds.

[gaf]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 12:36 AM
:lol:

Anyone that knows me on this board will know how incredibly ridiculous that sounds.
that you don&#39;t need drugs to be an arsehole?i knew that allready :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 12:36 AM
:lol:

Anyone that knows me on this board will know how incredibly ridiculous that sounds.
Are you going to reply to my post? I want this to develop into a debate.

[gaf]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 29 2004, 02:26 AM
Are you going to reply to my post? I want this to develop into a debate.
don&#39;t waste your time

[Y2A]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 01:44 AM
that you don&#39;t need drugs to be an arsehole?i knew that allready :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I support drug legalization imbecile.

And B-M, I have sent you a PM.

[gaf]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 02:48 AM
I support drug legalization imbecile.

And B-M, I have sent you a PM.
yeah jou still an arsehole

[Hiero]

This is a really stupid topic, these people arent inherently greedy they dont get off by seeing poor people, they dont laugh in real evil(muhahaha) way when they here about massive workers laid off. They just normally people and i doubt they are capitalist. They are part of the majority of people who are bribed off with luxies or doped up by religion or idiot tv.

It makes you sound like a fucking retard by just assuming these people in OI are rich evil sons or *****es.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by comrade [email protected] 29 2004, 12:55 PM
This is a really stupid topic, these people arent inherently greedy they dont get off by seeing poor people, they dont laugh in real evil(muhahaha) way when they here about massive workers laid off. They just normally people and i doubt they are capitalist. They are part of the majority of people who are bribed off with luxies or doped up by religion or idiot tv.

It makes you sound like a fucking retard by just assuming these people in OI are rich evil sons or *****es.
Keep thinking that.......MWHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


*Servant brings him caviar*

[DarthRepublican]

No matter how much you try to end poverty it will allway&#39;s exist. The solution is not forcing people to live at the same level of existance. That just put&#39;s us all in the same boat or in jail&#33; The last one is the Cuban secret to ending homelessness by tossing them into prison. Out of sight out of existance.

[Commie Girl]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 07:04 PM
The last one is the Cuban secret to ending homelessness by tossing them into prison. Out of sight out of existance.
<_< Can you explain this insane stupidity of yours? As a matter of fact, in Cuba, you do not find homelessness because everyone is guaranteed a place to live in some form of housing...if you need help, it is there for you without question. Have you also been to Cuba?

[Professor Moneybags]

Social conditions create problems.

I think this is the fact that most capitalists can&#39;t seem to come to terms with.

I can come to terms with it alright. The question of how it should be dealt with- in your opinion, by taking other people&#39;s property by force- is another matter.


And when you are a slave to wealth, won&#39;t it cause you to adopt certain mentalities, possibly feel worthless, too?

You can&#39;t be a slave to money. It&#39;s like saying you&#39;re a slave to food. If I was having my paycheck taken away from me and given to someone else, who "needed" more than me, then I&#39;d be a slave.


As for the United States being home to more charities than any other nation....well, who will disagree with this? A nation with this much money will have to be home to all of them charities.

And as for foreign aid, well...

Map & Graph: Economy: Economic Aid - Donor (per capita) (Top 20 Countries)

1. Luxembourg &#036;352.30 per person
2. Norway &#036;307.95 per person
3. Denmark &#036;302.72 per person
4. Netherlands &#036;216.71 per person
5. Sweden &#036;191.48 per person
6. Switzerland &#036;150.30 per person
7. France &#036;104.68 per person
8. United Kingdom &#036;74.88 per person
9. Belgium &#036;74.25 per person
10. Finland &#036;73.01 per person
11. Ireland &#036;72.11 per person
12. Japan &#036;71.53 per person
13. Germany &#036;67.96 per person
14. Austria &#036;50.07 per person
15. Australia &#036;45.30 per person
16. Canada &#036;40.36 per person
17. Spain &#036;33.07 per person
18. Portugal &#036;26.82 per person
19. New Zealand &#036;25.23 per person
20. United States &#036;23.76 per person

Source: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap

Interesting that the nation with the most power, influence and money (well, those three words are interchangable) by very, very far contributes, proportionally, about 15 times less than Luxembourg, the first country on this list.

You do have a bit of difficulty understanding statistics, don&#39;t you ? What&#39;s the population of Luxembourg and what&#39;s the population of the USA ?


Yes, and no one is there to help him or her out of this futility.

And you become another one of this "factors" that keeps folks in this state.

Thank you.

The fact that "they" have a political system that to some extent allows them to get out of this state is would be cause to give thanks. Many countries on Earth don&#39;t permit that at all.


And where is that fuck Professor Moneybags? That fool was supposed to reply to an old thread of mine but he just "forgot" that we had a heated debate going.

Dream on. I replied and I owned you. And I think we can do without the personal attacks.


I bet it was because of those prison and poverty statistics I provided after he asserted that, 1) non-whites are not the majority of those in prison, 2) non-whites are not the ones that commit the most crimes, 3) non-whites are not the ones that are affected by poverty and hostile social conditions the most.

It seems as if "poverty" is the common denominator here.

I&#39;ve already aswered this point. Poverty is not "the" cause of crime, as you foolishly posted "New York&#39;s most wanted" in attempt to proove this. The statistics didn&#39;t say what you thought they said; most of them were rapists and murderers (who killed people "over an argument"). Please explain how crimes like murder, rape and arson are "caused" by poverty, I&#39;d love to know.

And by the way, I&#39;m not here to reason with you. You&#39;ve proven yourself, like Ghazi, to be impervious to it. To you, force is the answer to everything.

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 06:35 AM
On the other hand, socialist countries, when not ravaged by war, didn&#39;t have poverty.
USSR ? China ?

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 28 2004, 02:12 PM
There are no fucking factory jobs, or any other employment, period&#33;
Perhaps now is the time to ask yourself why factories are closing down.

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 28 2004, 10:15 PM
1) Blame it on the inherent racial tendencies of blacks, or
2) Blame it on the system.

If you choose number one, you&#39;re a racist. If your choice is two, the theory behind capitalism is reduced to a piece of shit impractical philosophy.
Thankfully, I was smart enough not to fall for it. I certainly wouldn&#39;t call the system we&#39;re living in "capitalism" (as in LF, which Is what I refer to when I use the term), it&#39;s a mixed system.

[gaf]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 09:31 PM
Keep thinking that.......MWHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


*Servant brings him caviar*
just bring you spam.
school yard kid

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Commie [email protected] 30 2004, 02:57 AM
As a matter of fact, in Cuba, you do not find homelessness because everyone is guaranteed a place to live in some form of housing...if you need help, it is there for you without question.
Oh that&#39;s nice. At whose expense ?

[gaf]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 31 2004, 07:52 PM
Oh that&#39;s nice. At whose expense ?
embargo.

[Commie Girl]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 31 2004, 01:39 PM

You do have a bit of difficulty understanding statistics, don&#39;t you ? What&#39;s the population of Luxembourg and what&#39;s the population of the USA ?
Ummm....it says Per Capita&#33;

[Commie Girl]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 31 2004, 01:52 PM
Oh that&#39;s nice. At whose expense ?
That is the beauty...it is to benefit all, without hurting the rest&#33; Simple&#33;

[The Sloth]

Dream on. I replied and I owned you. And I think we can do without the personal attacks.

Yes, now I realize you have replied, my mistake. However, I have just made a rebuttal.

http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?s...pic=27649&st=60 (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=27649&st=60)

And you couldn&#39;t have been that offended when I called you a "fuck," after you said I am not capable of "conceptual thought," right you fuck? :D


I&#39;ve already aswered this point. Poverty is not "the" cause of crime, as you foolishly posted "New York&#39;s most wanted" in attempt to proove this. The statistics didn&#39;t say what you thought they said; most of them were rapists and murderers (who killed people "over an argument"). Please explain how crimes like murder, rape and arson are "caused" by poverty, I&#39;d love to know.

Don&#39;t be an idiot.

After you accused the statistics of "not proving" my point, I did some follow-up research and you dismissed it as "irrelevant" so you can focus on your point of socialism being like "crime," except "legal." I addressed this little "cop out" in that thread to which I just finished replying.

If you don&#39;t believe me, check the link I provided you with and re-read the statistics, along with the follow-up. Plus, keep in mind the fact that "adverse social conditions" such as poverty cause aggressive behavior (such as "rape", "arson" and "murder"), which leads to death over "petty arguments" (this was proven in the same thread through a quote from Stanley Greenspan, which I emphasized once again).


You do have a bit of difficulty understanding statistics, don&#39;t you ? What&#39;s the population of Luxembourg and what&#39;s the population of the USA ?

I understand, but take into consideration....

1) The United States has much more money than Luxembourg, while
2) Luxembourg takes, proportionally to the U.S., more away from social funding for its people at the expense of sending money to foreign aid.


The fact that "they" have a political system that to some extent allows them to get out of this state is would be cause to give thanks. Many countries on Earth don&#39;t permit that at all.

It is "better than nothing," I agree, but still isn&#39;t "good enough."


And by the way, I&#39;m not here to reason with you. You&#39;ve proven yourself, like Ghazi, to be impervious to it. To you, force is the answer to everything.

If I am "unreasonable," then why am I the one that wants to kick in my monitor everytime after I&#39;m reading your posts that are evidence of you not understanding one of my basic points?

[Nas]

no matter how much "charity" money the rich or middle class give, it still is the same , things dont change, you will always find a begger on the streets of USA(specially in the cities) There will always be a rich guy and a poor guy, you cant help it, thats just the way it is with capitalism.

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Commie [email protected] 31 2004, 09:13 PM
That is the beauty...it is to benefit all, without hurting the rest&#33; Simple&#33;
Well evaded.

[Professor Moneybags]

And you couldn&#39;t have been that offended when I called you a "fuck," after you said I am not capable of "conceptual thought," right you fuck?

No, I&#39;m not offended. I&#39;ve been called worse.


After you accused the statistics of "not proving" my point, I did some follow-up research and you dismissed it as "irrelevant" so you can focus on your point of socialism being like "crime," except "legal."

Erm. It is.


If you don&#39;t believe me, check the link I provided you with and re-read the statistics, along with the follow-up. Plus, keep in mind the fact that "adverse social conditions" such as poverty cause aggressive behavior (such as "rape", "arson" and "murder"), which leads to death over "petty arguments" (this was proven in the same thread through a quote from Stanley Greenspan, which I emphasized once again).

Why does it cause aggressive behaviour ? Why aren&#39;t we seeing everyone who lives in poverty killing each other ? This all sounds of determinism to me.


1) The United States has much more money than Luxembourg, while
2) Luxembourg takes, proportionally to the U.S., more away from social funding for its people at the expense of sending money to foreign aid.

I forgot to ask : Is this money "donated" voluntarily by people or is it raised through taxation ? It&#39;s easy to be generous with other people&#39;s money.


If I am "unreasonable," then why am I the one that wants to kick in my monitor everytime after I&#39;m reading your posts that are evidence of you not understanding one of my basic points?

Because as I said before, force is your solution to everything. I do understand your points as well as the false dichotomy you were trying to force upon me.

Go on, it&#39;s monitor kicking time...

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2004, 07:53 PM
embargo.
Never heard of him.

[The Sloth]

Erm. It is.

How is this relevant?&#33;

You attempted to deliver your "coup de grace" by "pointing out" that the crimes I (initially) provided seemed not to point to the fact that they are committed due to socio-economic reasons.

However, the second I disproved this notion (especially by also going into the fact that specific material conditions cause this anti-social behavior, which is not limited to "stealing") by providing you the statistic that 61% of crimes are committed for the "improvement" of socio-economic conditions (and most of the remainder due to other types of anti-social behavior caused by specific material conditions), it is then that you went into your other and irrelevant point.

If you want to argue whether the redistribution of wealth is "immoral," then do it in another thread and stick to the topic for now&#33;


Why does it cause aggressive behaviour ? Why aren&#39;t we seeing everyone who lives in poverty killing each other ? This all sounds of determinism to me.

I thought you said you "know" a lot about this subject&#33;

"Poverty" and other material conditions ("other" meaning the worship of gangster rap, the glorification of the cut-throat and "hard" personality, the low self-esteem suffered due to oppressive and hostile environments, etc.) are only an "adverse/risk factor," not a "guarantee" of specific behavior in the future. I don&#39;t know how many fucking times I must quote this shit over and over again for you to understand it, so here it goes one more time...

(Taken from another thread)

Now, let me dig out an old paragraph of a book I have already quoted for you in this thread. It explicitly states that poverty and other social conditions help determine the child&#39;s behavior, and, of course, the mother&#39;s method of "teaching" what is "right and wrong"; Stanley I. Greenspan, M.D., a professor of clinical psychology, writes in his book The Growth of the Mind and the Endangered Origins of Intelligence:

“Furthermore, when emotional risk factors were added to social and economic ones, we found that children who came from families with four or more adverse factors, such as depressed or addicted parents, a harsh emotional climate, poor education, low income, and low occupational and social standing, were twenty-four times likelier than children from homes with no more than one adverse factor to score below 85 in IQ. Kids from more fortunate homes scored overwhelmingly in the normal to superior range. In addition, as expected, children from families plagued by difficulties suffered more behavioral problems. Follow-up studies of these children at age thirteen confirmed these findings.”

As a back-up to these studies, it seems as if addiction runs rampant in neighborhoods of color (and thus, neighborhoods of LOW INCOME), along with depression associated with addiction and harsh emotional climates -- ample opportunity for the children to grow up in a "certain way" that would lead to anti-social behavior.




If you want to argue any of this, continue here at this thread that I replied to a couple of days ago: http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?s...60&#entry449606 (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=27649&st=60&#entry449606) It is the post before the last one on that page, in a reply to you.

[Professor Moneybags]

How is this relevant?&#33;

You attempted to deliver your "coup de grace" by "pointing out" that the crimes I (initially) provided seemed not to point to the fact that they are committed due to socio-economic reasons.

That&#39;s because they didn&#39;t. The cause of crime is criminals.


However, the second I disproved this notion (especially by also going into the fact that specific material conditions cause this anti-social behavior, which is not limited to "stealing")

So I was right then. If mere lack of money was the cause of crime, then crime would just be limited to "stealing" and it&#39;s variants. But anti-social behaviour ? Is poverty the cause of anti-social behaviour ? Or is the anti-social behaviour/disrespectful of people&#39;s rights/"the world owes me a living" attitude the cause of poverty ?


by providing you the statistic that 61% of crimes are committed for the "improvement" of socio-economic conditions (and most of the remainder due to other types of anti-social behavior caused by specific material conditions), it is then that you went into your other and irrelevant point.

How many of these 61% are starving, (so that they have a something resembling a genuine need to turn to crime) ?


I don&#39;t know how many fucking times I must quote this shit over and over again for you to understand it, so here it goes one more time...

And it doesn&#39;t matter how many times, either. It doesn&#39;t refute the point I&#39;ve just made (above).

[gaf]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 1 2004, 01:44 PM
Never heard of him.
who knows? you may be meet him once

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 2 2004, 12:55 PM
If you want to argue whether the redistribution of wealth is "immoral," then do it in another thread and stick to the topic for now&#33;
That, as far as I am concerned, is the main issue.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 2 2004, 06:58 PM
That, as far as I am concerned, is the main issue.
And thus you are not denying that the statistics and currently known facts prove crime occurs as a reaction to specific material conditions and the bettering of socio-economic position, are you? It is the claim that you ignored in favor of moving the debate in another direction.

If you would like to do that, start another thread.

As far as I&#39;m concerned, for right now, you should either reply to the present arguments and click on the link I provided you with that will re-direct you to the other thread.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 2 2004, 06:52 PM






That&#39;s because they didn&#39;t. The cause of crime is criminals.

And what is the cause of criminals?


So I was right then. If mere lack of money was the cause of crime, then crime would just be limited to "stealing"...

I think you need to take a literacy class before you attempt to tackle my posts:

"Poverty and other material conditions ("other" meaning the worship of gangster rap, the glorification of the cut-throat and "hard" personality, the low self-esteem suffered due to oppressive and hostile environments, etc.) are only an "adverse/risk factor," not a "guarantee" of specific behavior in the future."

Do you understand what that means? Can you read what it says in the parentheses? Those are also "material conditions," as poverty is not the only "condition" that contributes to a certain behavior.

When it comes to poverty, you also get the "fantastic" idea that "the crimes that stem from poverty are strictly the crimes that are based on the improvement of one&#39;s socio-economic conditions." That&#39;s simply not the case as poverty also helps contribute to (not "cause" -- don&#39;t attempt to mix-up &#39;cause&#39; and &#39;contribute&#39;&#33;) hopelessness, drug addiction, and thus a harsh emotional climate due to the "hardening" of spirits and everything that has been aforementioned. Now, when it comes to the "harsh emotional climate," this becomes the major contributor to future anti-social behavior in children. The passage I have quoted for you only touches a little on the subject -- the entire section discusses the raising of children in such climates, and frame-by-frame follows the mental and social development of these children.

Like I said, I thought you knew "a lot" on this subject. Why does it seem as if you don&#39;t even have a grasp on the basics?


But anti-social behaviour ? Is poverty the cause of anti-social behaviour ? Or is the anti-social behaviour/disrespectful of people&#39;s rights/"the world owes me a living" attitude the cause of poverty ?

Already answered, I believe.

I think I provided you with several links to crime, morality, etc. either in this thread or the one I gave you a link to. Spend a little time with that.


How many of these 61% are starving, (so that they have a something resembling a genuine need to turn to crime) ?

I don&#39;t think many individuals allow "unemployment" to loom over their heads long enough to begin the search for "illegal work" while they begin starving.

Drugs pay the rent.

[Professor Moneybags]

And thus you are not denying that the statistics and currently known facts prove crime occurs as a reaction to specific material conditions and the bettering of socio-economic position, are you? It is the claim that you ignored in favor of moving the debate in another direction.

I have already commented on these points. Now for the questions you evaded : How many of those in poverty are starving, thus warranting them to turn to crime to stay alive ? If those comitting the crimes are not in this situation, then where is their excuse ?

[Professor Moneybags]

"Poverty and other material conditions ("other" meaning the worship of gangster rap, the glorification of the cut-throat and "hard" personality, the low self-esteem suffered due to oppressive and hostile environments, etc.) are only an "adverse/risk factor," not a "guarantee" of specific behavior in the future."

Do you understand what that means? Can you read what it says in the parentheses? Those are also "material conditions," as poverty is not the only "condition" that contributes to a certain behavior.

Then why are you trying to make out that it is the main one ? That was the reason you posted it though, wasn&#39;t it ? To prove that "the poor" are comitting crime because of "poverty".

I&#39;m not as daft as you people seem to think I am. I can read quite well thank you, especially between the lines.


When it comes to poverty, you also get the "fantastic" idea that "the crimes that stem from poverty are strictly the crimes that are based on the improvement of one&#39;s socio-economic conditions."

I didn&#39;t "get" this idea at all. I pointed out the absurdity of your claim that if poverty was the cause of crime, then crime would be largely limited to different forms of stealing with very few exceptions. It isn&#39;t. Next bit...


hopelessness, drug addiction, and thus a harsh emotional climate due to the "hardening" of spirits and everything that has been aforementioned.

...Is poverty the cause of all of those, or the effect ?


Like I said, I thought you knew "a lot" on this subject. Why does it seem as if you don&#39;t even have a grasp on the basics?

Because I search answers that are correct, rather than convenient.


I think I provided you with several links to crime, morality, etc. either in this thread or the one I gave you a link to. Spend a little time with that.

I don&#39;t see the point; Kropotkin seems to dispose of morality altogether by declaring it subjective and a "primitive superstition". Then again, perhaps that&#39;s part of the problem.