[PApagreg]

Spoiler:

Originally Posted by Leo656

- People shouldn't get paid for NOT working. If one person takes off of work, others have to work harder to cover for them. Everyone loses money because one guy wants to take his family to DisneyLand.

People used to have to SAVE if they one day wanted to have nice things or take a trip. Now it's looked at as a right... because people get tired? Burnt out? Boo-hoo.


- Having kids is a choice, and a bad one. Rampant population growth is going to leave most of the planet homeless and starving in less than a century... but sure, have more kids. But either way, it's a CHOICE, and again, when a woman CHOOSES to get knocked up and take time off from work, the company loses money all the way around. And the woman whines, "I deserve to be paid for NOT working! Support my foolish, selfish choices! Or else... I might have less money!" Tough sh*t. Next time put your diaphragm in, dummy. I or anyone else shouldn't have to sacrifice a single goddamn thing to support your ignorant, selfish decision to "have a family".

I just love this right here just because people use to get raw deals in the past it automatically means we have to suck it up and not improve the standard our of living. Did you know modern labour laws weren't a thing until 1935-1975 so going by your logic those people should have "suck it up" just because we can't have progress.

Originally Posted by Leo656

- Many people who end up impoverished from health problems weren't taking care of themselves in the first place - which is why many companies now provide incentives to employees who don't smoke, join a gym, etc. etc. People who make their bed through various poor lifestyle choices deserve to lie in it and weep. Let the three-pack-a-day smoker pay for their new lung, and if they can't, let 'em rot. Not at all my concern.

Sure, sometimes people get sick for no reason, and that sucks, but again, you're supposed to save and plan ahead for things, and people don't anymore. They "Need" the big flatscreen, they "need" a nicer place to live, so they simply "can't" whittle money aside for things like health care. I'm as guilty as anyone, but I admit it. I don't save like I should, but I don't blame other people for that, I just own up to the fact that I care more about having nice things and I spend money frivolously, because I've never planned to live very long anyway and would rather have fun while I'm alive. So if I get a fatal disease I'll probably die from it. Oh well. At least the bills will be someone else's problem!

Plus, aren't there things where people can go online and mooch for money now? GoFundMe and things like that? I'm forever seeing people online doing that when they get sick. So that's a thing.

Do you know how expensive medical bills are in this country it costs a hell of a lot more than a new TV also its not just hospital bills, prescriptions are also very expensive. The Gofundme example pretty much shows how bad the American health system is if people have to resort to Gofundme.

Originally Posted by Leo656

- The gap between rich and poor is *technically* the widest, but that fails to take into account that the U.S. has, by far, more millionaires in it than any other country, AND, that even the poorest person in America has a much higher quality of life than they would anywhere else in the world. Because "poor" means vastly different things depending on where you live, and the American "poor person" of today has a better quality of life than most "rich Americans" did 100 years ago, they simply have different priorities. 100 years ago, poor people saved to better their station in life; today, poor people piss money away to have nicer things because "Screw it, I'm poor and 'can't' save anyway, may as well enjoy myself."

Obviously, lots of countries have a MUCH smaller Rich-To-Poor gap... like North Korea. Because everyone there is dirt-poor except for ONE guy. Should THAT be the standard we chase after? It's an economic fact: The countries with the smallest Rich-To-Poor gap are overwhelmingly POOR.

There are literally tons of developed countries with better income equality than us also the number of millionaires isn't that big of a factor to income inequality hell Switzerland has more millionares per captia and it still has better income equality compared to the United States http://www.businessinsider.com/ranke...e-world-2015-7.

Originally Posted by Leo656

The American gap is only so wide because so many people are rich! HOW can that be an "injustice"? Any random person, from any background, of any color in the rainbow, has the BEST chance in the world to become a millionaire, or even a billionaire, if they live in the U.S. They also have the best chance to STAY rich, on account of our tax policies which don't punish someone for actually succeeding in life, just because other people don't have the same.Sounds like a great deal, to me.

You do know not everyone who is a millionaire or billionaire is self made right sometimes they come from old money also those people make up less than 7 percent of the population which means most people aren't really living well in the US. Also you know why rich people tend to stay rich in the United States, its because of our crappy tax policy so while the rich stays rich the poor stays poor so YAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY to the Status Quo
The thing is, there's two schools of thought on how to generate "Income Equality":
1: Take money from the Rich People and give it to the Poor People, so everyone is "equal".
2. Teach Poor People how to turn themselves into Rich People.

Originally Posted by Leo656

Option 1 has been tried countless times throughout history and never truly works. You end up with a nation of, essentially, "functionally poor" people, dependent on government hand-outs.

Option 2 works SO well, that many, MANY people have gotten excessively rich simply by sharing "How To Get Rich" techniques, which is pretty funny in itself. Problem is, economic success generally requires sacrifice, hard work, long hours, little leisure time, competent saving and investment practices, and not worrying about things like "vacations" or "a family" until you can comfortably afford them. And people nowadays are generally piss-poor at delaying gratification. They want what they want because someone else has it, and that's all they care about. Not, "How did that person become so successful?" Just, "It isn't fair that they have more than I do." Well, it's totally fair, they have more because they made better life choices..

Or(and be prepared this may blow your mind) maybe we can have better healthcare standards for our country so people won't spend a **** ton on medicine or medical bills,raise our minimum wage so more people can afford necessities and maybe a few luxuries(which yes is good for the economy.), and maybe make sure colleges have less tuition rates.

Originally Posted by Leo656

-I say all this as someone who's been up and down, financially, many times. Sympathy and Empathy are piss-poor things to base economic policy on, and people who work hard deserve more than people who don't, "can't", or won't. The American system provides more opportunities than anywhere else in the world to go from "Zero-To-Hero" and people do it every day. I have no respect for people looking for hand-outs or the government to "provide" for them; it's weak, lazy, and selfish.

Well guess what your respect isn't going to feed, heal, or shelter anyone so your respect means nothing

Originally Posted by Leo656

Our way isn't "perfect", but it's still better than any other system, as seen by the many American people who have managed to succeed. If a person truly doesn't believe that... your priorities are screwed up and I can't help you. "I want" doesn't equate with "I deserve". If you earn something, you deserve it.

For every person who manage to succeed there are hundreds of thousands of people who either stay in the status quo or get off worse. Like why are you so against improving the standard of living for other people what just because you had to be miserable while being poor it automatically means people have to be miserable too. Also again

[QUOTE=Leo656;1762859]I'm never shocked when people with a low opinion of America come to it by looking at how our worst factors are represented. If you judge every country by their worst, then everyplace sucks, and I'm pretty sure that's not true. Judge anyplace by their best... well, our best is The Best Anywhere, indisputably.

Its not really judging America by its worse but judging how the average citizen lives compared to other developed nations which is abysmal for all of our "greatness" as a country how come the daily lives of our own countrymen is worse compared to other developed nations. How come those who are less great than else still treat their own people better than we do.

Originally Posted by Leo656

We just expect people to work a little harder for the perks. I think it's become part of the cultural DNA that you only deserve what you truly earn, and I genuinely have no problem with that.

Paying expensive prescription pills and medical bills out the ass, having a mediocre public schooling plan, having one the worst tuition rates and student debt isn't really "work a little harder".

Originally Posted by Leo656

As for "room for improvement", sure, but to think we're actually significantly "worse" than anywhere else is pure fantasy. The people complaining the most aren't doing enough to improve their station, the ones who are have very few complaints. That tells me all I need to know.

What about people like Mark Zuckerberg or Bill Gates who advocated for universal healthcare those people improve their station and they still think the standard of living in America needs to improve.