Random Politics & Religion #00

Where is the fault in comprehension you think?

Not giving capitalism it's due credit for being the sole reason for bringing almost everyone on the planet out of poverty.

or

Thinking the US system which isn't capitalism is actually capitalism?

Why so pessimistic? Because most of the "progress" is rooted in giving more money and more power to an organization that has proven time and time again that it doesn't know how to properly manage either one. You can pretend all you want that the government has our best interests in mind, but reality says otherwise.

The way to get out of poverty is to stop being poor it's really that simple people !

Just grab oneself by the bootstraps eh? Why didn't they think of that?

Just like slaves should have just run away, eh?

Olive Garden is not truly authentic Italian cuisine

Answering the real questions with clarity.

Thats how he answers all of the questions, its what stirred up the Muslim talk.

My argument was completely with the "everyone on the planet" statement, which was just pants-on-head idiocy. Large swaths of the world are still very, very poor.

The economic systems of many of those countries are hobbled by the fact that the rule of law is often specious at best, which undermines any real economic activity; hard/impossible to enforce contracts, etc

reason for bringing almost everyone on the planet out of poverty

Placing the fault is difficult, but in general I just attribute it to misplaced faith in government. Yes, the government does good things that everyone likes to point whenever this point is brought up (national parks, roads, etc.), but the waste, bloat, and overall corruption is often overlooked for the sake of optimism. What the government needs is liposuction, and we're giving it overpriced band-aids instead.

First, I qualified everyone with "almost" which does clue you into a different group of people than "everyone".

The natural state of human existence is tyranny, poverty, and oppression. We have existed in that state for millennia. It is only when we adopted capitalism that we began to change that.

I can see why we don't agree if you honestly believe that.

Yeah people really thrived during the eras of mercantilism and feudalism.

Why do you think they want to revert back to feudalism and call it "progression"?

Hillary Clinton wants women to wear the feminism label with a badge of honor.

In an interview with Lena Dunham, the presidential contender said she’s “puzzled” by women who refuse to identify as feminists, although they fit the definition and support gender equality.

“I’m always a little bit puzzled when any woman of whatever age, but particularly a young woman, says something like, ‘Well, I believe in equal rights, but I’m not a feminist.’ Well, a feminist is by definition someone who believes in equal rights,” Clinton said during an interview for Dunham’s new site, LennyLetter.com

Politico released an exclusive preview of the interview, which will be posted on Dunham’s online digital newsletter on Sept. 29. Dunham co-created LennyLetter with “Girls” executive producer Jennifer Konner.

“I’m hoping that people will not be afraid to say, ‘That doesn’t mean you hate men,’” Clinton added. It doesn’t mean you want to separate out the world, so you’re not a part of ordinary life — that’s not what it means at all!” Clinton said. “It just means that we believe that women have the same rights as men, politically, culturally, socially, economically.”

Yeah people really thrived during the eras of mercantilism and feudalism.

And those soviets really thrived after communism too.

That is because when the movement was born there were no other connotations to it. So yes, a woman believing in equal rights would be feminist.

The fact that the concept was recently hijacked by misandrists is unfortunate, but doesn't change the meaning of feminism. Have you noticed how we always say "neo-feminism" or "tumblr feminism"?

*sigh*