|
|
|
|
|
|
by gokuknows
5033 days ago
|
|
|
Michael,
I live in Silicon Valley and grew up most of my life in Israel and Europe (France). All I can say is honestly Americans don't even know how good they have it. France is doing so bad I don't even know where to start. They barely have any innovation and whatever they have comes from companies that have been in power for decades. France made it so easy to get welfare and taxes so high (40-50%) that it's better to collect welfare then actually do any work (I have friends there in their 20s actually doing this). What I love about Capitalism is NEW wealth and power is created every 10 years. Where was Facebook, Google, Salesforce and Twitter 10 years ago? (this is a short list there are many smaller multi million dollars companies created in the past 10 years in the US). I know you see this as something normal or not such a big deal, but in other countries this never happens, the same companies stay in power. What I am trying to say is that Capitalism WORKS very well, the wealth in America changes hands very rapidly and there are endless opportunities to create more wealth. Did you ever think of the impact that Facebook/twitter/reddit had on the world? Helping the Arab spring, flowing information freely etc.
I am sure you will find holes in what I said, all I can say is that I am a huge fan of what this country represents (capitalism) and if you stray away from this system that has made the US what it is trust me we will fall hard.
What I think is happening in the US is a bunch of lazy people who want something for nothing are rising up. They hate the 1% (which created a lot of jobs and innovation) for no good reason.
I hope Capitalism gets more "sexy" and gets great new representatives who defend it not retards like Paul Ryan and Romney. I think it will make everything a lot better :) |
|
|
Envy and covetousness aren't "good" reasons, but they are certainly reasons humans have used to hate each other throughout history.
> France made it so easy to get welfare and taxes so high (40-50%) that it's better to collect welfare then actually do any work
Romney's ad criticizing Obama's rollback of the requirement established under President Clinton, that welfare recipients must actively look for work, speaks to exactly this point.
I wonder if technology will ever make this model sustainable -- if we have most of our farms, factories and mines run by robots and computers with minimal human intervention, could we produce enough food, clothing, shelter, and basic necessities for everyone if the only people who work are those who wish to do so?
The reason Republicans have produced mediocre candidates for a while is that the party has too many constituencies: You have the religious right (mainly concerned about moral decay and social issues, think Huckabee), the neocon faction (pro-big-government and foreign policy hawks, think GWB), and the libertarians (Tea Party, Ron Paul -- mainly in favor of smaller government and lower taxes).
Their traditional base is dwindling; a near-majority of people don't pay any federal taxes, so can't be bribed by tax cuts and are very uncomfortable with social-program cuts. Religion is on the decline. We haven't suffered any major terrorist attacks lately, and GWB's wars have left many interventionists with a sour taste in their mouths. So they're trying to reach out to new constituencies; in this election cycle, it's immigrants and women, judging by the convention speeches.
We need a strong candidate who can fix the mess before we become locked circling the drain that France has gone down. It's hard to see this candidate coming from either party.