4 ms·

To be fair, how is that even remotely true? Look at the wealth, convenience, leisure and abundance all around you. Even people with lower income experience high

To be fair, how is that even remotely true? Look at the wealth, convenience, leisure and abundance all around you. Even people with lower income experience high standards of living. The system we have now is not without fault, but it has done better than any other before in meeting our needs and desires. I don't understand why people make wild claims that everything is distributed to only a few hands, thats preposterous. If you really believe that, you are poisoned by ideology.

charlesu 6y ago
> Look at the wealth, convenience, leisure and abundance all around you. Even people with lower income experience high standards of living. The system we have now is not without fault, but it has done better than any other before in meeting our needs and desires. You should spend some time in Appalachia if you think that's true.
- crisdux 6y ago
  You are making a logical fallacy and I don't think it's worth my time to actually attempt to discuss this with you.
  - charlesu 6y ago
    There's nothing to discuss because you don't really have much of an argument. "Look around. Things are better than what they were" doesn't negate the fact that market forces are bad at distributing resources. You can look at the COVID-19 crisis as well. "Market forces" led to distribution channels with no redundancy, leaving the United States with a shortage of something super basic: PPE.
    - motorcycleman9 6y ago
      You continue to state that market forces are bad, while not paying any attention to the counterargument that they are pretty good compared to the alternatives. Making an honest comparison would be a much tedious discussion.
      - charlesu 6y ago
        I'm not saying market forces are categorically bad. I'm saying they're bad at some things. Market forces are terrible at distributing housing, healthcare, and primary education. As with most things, there's a happy medium between unfettered market forces and central planning.
WealthVsSurvive 6y ago
This is patently and simply false; if you view home ownership data worldwide, you'll see distinct patters of more home ownership in countries and localities in which the building, sale, and ownership of homes is encouraged by the government, oftentimes protecting it from the exploitative practices of capital accumulation. US home ownership is low relative to its wealth, lower than former communist blocks. Best system my ass.

charlesu 6y ago

> Look at the wealth, convenience, leisure and abundance all around you. Even people with lower income experience high standards of living. The system we have now is not without fault, but it has done better than any other before in meeting our needs and desires. You should spend some time in Appalachia if you think that's true.

crisdux 6y ago
You are making a logical fallacy and I don't think it's worth my time to actually attempt to discuss this with you.
- charlesu 6y ago
  There's nothing to discuss because you don't really have much of an argument. "Look around. Things are better than what they were" doesn't negate the fact that market forces are bad at distributing resources. You can look at the COVID-19 crisis as well. "Market forces" led to distribution channels with no redundancy, leaving the United States with a shortage of something super basic: PPE.
  - motorcycleman9 6y ago
    You continue to state that market forces are bad, while not paying any attention to the counterargument that they are pretty good compared to the alternatives. Making an honest comparison would be a much tedious discussion.
    - charlesu 6y ago
      I'm not saying market forces are categorically bad. I'm saying they're bad at some things. Market forces are terrible at distributing housing, healthcare, and primary education. As with most things, there's a happy medium between unfettered market forces and central planning.

WealthVsSurvive 6y ago

This is patently and simply false; if you view home ownership data worldwide, you'll see distinct patters of more home ownership in countries and localities in which the building, sale, and ownership of homes is encouraged by the government, oftentimes protecting it from the exploitative practices of capital accumulation. US home ownership is low relative to its wealth, lower than former communist blocks. Best system my ass.