Republicans really need a black candidate because

[lazs2]

yep.. the things that yarbles says about fairness and opportunity and such are all fine.. until you get the details of which he is not tooooo forthcoming.. other than "we are willing to accept a higher tax rate" and it is "40%" of their income...

I would not live as they do..  crowded into craphole cities with dirty clothes and yellow, rotted teeth..  driving around in tiny little cars on the wrong side of the road and with very little choice in goods.. vans driving around looking to arrest anyone who doesn't pay the TV tax.

I was there.. I stayed and hung out with limeys who were making as much as me or more and they lived like ghetto dwellers.. I would not live in their homes.   I would hate to have to shop in their stores and..  since I hate bars (pubs) I would have nothing to do in their country.. I like hot rods and collecting and shooting firearms..

in their "reasonable restrictions" of a country I would have to give up everything I love.. just so I could have crappy teeth and live in a dump of a house and go to bars for entertainment.

no thanks...

In the US any person who wants can rise to any level he wants...  I don't believe in the minimum wage..  some jobs just arent worth spit.    You don't try to raise a family if all you aspire to is a job not worth spit.. that is real opportunity.

lazs

[BnZ]

Logic Dictates then people in the more mobile northeren European Countries work harder as they achive more from humble begginings according to your reasoning despite being hamstrung by socialism.
 

*Yawn*. You are close to being right, without knowing or understanding the implications. You have just hit upon the un-PC little fact that mean I.Q. of the populace has more to do with prosperity or lack thereof than their economic system. Also, may I assume that at least some European countries understand that if you produce widgets at home instead of importing them from China, the widget may cost more, but it won't matter because you'll have a good job at the widget factory?

[BnZ]

I was there.. I stayed and hung out with limeys who were making as much as me or more and they lived like ghetto dwellers.. I would not live in their homes.   I would hate to have to shop in their stores and..  since I hate bars (pubs) I would have nothing to do in their country.. I like hot rods and collecting and shooting firearms..
. that is real opportunity.

lazs

Actually Sir, last time I checked they were considering more restrictions on pubs. Or at least mandating unbreakable beer bottles. Turns out, when people get drunk, sometimes they fight, and hit each other in the head with beer bottles, which are more dangerous when broken. And if someone, somewhere, gets cut to ribbons in a bar fight, why society will just collapse. Being something of a sword enthusiast, I also watched with interest the attempts in Australia and the U.K. to make it illegal to have anything but a dull sword locked in a safe bolted to the floor...turns out, one Asian immigrant gang member in Australia cut off the others hand with some sort of cheap sword in a rumble once. So it logically follows that everyone who uses their swords for re-enacting or cutting watermelons and bamboo must now grind the edges off and keep them in a safe, because swords are way too dangerous to society. Then there was the thing about long knives with points being dangerous...turns out a long knife with a point can reach a vital organ when thrust into a torso. Of course, good old Neanderthal could tell them what a lethal killing machine a fire-hardened pointy stick could be...better get on stick control immediately. And so it goes with the restricting mentality.

Truth is, time was in this country when you could go into a general store, and if you were tall enough to plop your money on the counter, you could buy a gun, ammo, bowie knife, jug of whiskey, jar of laudanum, or hell, a case of dynamite. And yes, people DID get shot/cut/drunk/stoned sometimes, but not so much that society collapsed, or whatever the bogeyman of the week was. You can give the people a freedom all the while realizing some will use it badly and all will not be hunky-dory...or you can try to wrap everything in bubble-wrap and require helmets for kids when going outside or jerking off vigorously...and things still won't be hunky-dory.

[Bodhi]

*Yawn*. You are close to being right, without knowing or understanding the implications. You have just hit upon the un-PC little fact that mean I.Q. of the populace has more to do with prosperity or lack thereof than their economic system. Also, may I assume that at least some European countries understand that if you produce widgets at home instead of importing them from China, the widget may cost more, but it won't matter because you'll have a good job at the widget factory?

That should be able to go without saying.  What Yarbles is missing the bus on is that those supposedly well off northern European countries are losing more and more of their wealth and social mobility each year.  The more uneducated immigrants that arrive, the smaller the pie gets for everyone to share. 

In the end, they will find that their socialist ways will break them.

[Timofei]

What in the world does what my government spends money on have to do with how much a part-time starter job should pay? 

Simply put, less spending to kill people (military spending)= more money to free health care and free education. So that a minimum wage full time job can actually support yourself and your family.
Not utopia. Reality in many countries.
Utopia in more backward countries, like America ?

[Holden McGroin]

Simply put, less spending to kill people (military spending)= more money to free health care and free education.

If health care and education are free, why do we need more money for them?

[Timofei]

What Yarbles is missing the bus on is that those supposedly well off northern European countries are losing more and more of their wealth and social mobility each year.  The more uneducated immigrants that arrive, the smaller the pie gets for everyone to share. 
In the end, they will find that their socialist ways will break them.

The 20 happiest nations in the World are:
1 - Denmark
2 - Switzerland
3 - Austria
4 - Iceland
5 - The Bahamas
6 - Finland
7 - Sweden

Sorry, USA did not win...
http://www2.le.ac.uk/ebulletin/news/press-releases/2000-2009/2006/07/nparticle.2006-07-28.2448323827

[Hangtime]

Happy Countries?

Enjoy your happiness.

Brought to you by the folks that protect it for you.

[Timofei]

"Hungry ? Eat our mighty aircraft carrier, punk."

[Bodhi]

Simply put, less spending to kill people (military spending)= more money to free health care and free education. So that a minimum wage full time job can actually support yourself and your family.
Not utopia. Reality in many countries.
Utopia in more backward countries, like America ?

Perhaps you could also look at the outcome should America not continue to "kill people" and instead spent that money here in our country.  Perhaps you could also look at us not giving the billions upon billions in foreign aid to impoverished nations (even those that hate us).  What would happen then?  Countries like yours would have to start footing the bill for world security. 

Instead of suggesting that we create a society where we do not help the rest of the world, but instead create a socialist utopia, "So that a minimum wage full time job can actually support yourself and your family", you could look and realize that a family can survive and do well making at or close to minimum wage.  That's not saying they will have everything brand new and luxury, but they can live well, own a home, and work to improve their state in life.  That's the key that socialists miss.  It is not everyone's right to "have a living". instead it is everyone's right to have the opportunity to make a living.  What they choose to do with it is up to them. 

[Bodhi]

The 20 happiest nations in the World are:
1 - Denmark
2 - Switzerland
3 - Austria
4 - Iceland
5 - The Bahamas
6 - Finland
7 - Sweden

Sorry, USA did not win...
http://www2.le.ac.uk/ebulletin/news/press-releases/2000-2009/2006/07/nparticle.2006-07-28.2448323827

Read the article and found not one thing that could even remotely determine a scientific value of that study.  But, hey, if it makes you happy, I'm happy for you.

[lazs2]

This is laughable...  "happiest countries"??? 

Maybe happy for the people who are there.. who don't know any better..  I...me.. I would not be happy if asked to live as they do.

the other thing that makes no sense....  is saying that the people have can move up from their "humble beginnings" 

Does this statement not strike anyone else as odd?   I mean.. you have had socialism for 100 or more years in these countries..  they have "free" health care and "free" school all the way up till they are embarrassed to even be in school.. they have every concievable social program..

Who the hell is still having a "humble beginning" anyway?   And if they are...  why the hell are they?

lazs

[Bodhi]

This is laughable...  "happiest countries"??? 

Maybe happy for the people who are there.. who don't know any better..  I...me.. I would not be happy if asked to live as they do.

the other thing that makes no sense....  is saying that the people have can move up from their "humble beginnings" 

Does this statement not strike anyone else as odd?   I mean.. you have had socialism for 100 or more years in these countries..  they have "free" health care and "free" school all the way up till they are embarrassed to even be in school.. they have every concievable social program..

Who the hell is still having a "humble beginning" anyway?   And if they are...  why the hell are they?

lazs

I guess if you didn't know any better and were raised in a nasty, rusted, dented bucket of pig poo, and the government moved you into a nicer bucket you'd probably be happy too.  Of course it still means you live in pig poo.

[Yarbles]

Rantings asside and who has the best country stuff there was a point to this actually 2.

Point 1

It is the republicans not the Democrats who are the natural party of many minorities and immigrant groups as they share thir social conservatism.

Point 2 has also come out in the process and it is a question really.

If we assume some Northern European countries with high levels of state provision in health education and welfare benefits still have as vibrant or more vibrant culture of self improvement evidenced by high levels of social mobility. Is it a good idea if this were to hold true in the US. i.e. would good quality free to the recipient healthcare, education and social security benefits for those who cannot look after themselves as well as most people can be a good idea if it did not dammage the enterprise culture.   

I dont know if I have explained that very well but I would suggest a good way to judge the quality of a culture is by how well it treats the less fortunate eg dissabled, mentally inadequate and sick as well as the unededucated. If they can be treated well without damaging the culture as a whole is this a good idea?

BTW I would argue there is no problem with inequlity as long as there is equality of opportunity and if people are willing to pay for expensive educations and use influence to give their children an advantage this does not promote that ideal.

[Bronk]

Welcome to walmart. Now give me my $30k a year.

LMAO ..... Idiots.