Tell me, what difference(s) do you see between the market and government?
Where do I begin? They are different in so many ways; in some ways the market is superior, in other ways the government is. Maybe you could narrow the question down a little.
Why aren’t you doing more? I guess you want children to go hungry! Shame on you!
Go right ahead and try to prove that.
What fundamental and/or inherent difference(s) do you see between the market and government? Begin wherever you like.
Why aren’t you doing more? I guess you want children to go hungry! Shame on you!
Because I am financially constrained. If others who were not so constrained donated more then charity would work brilliantly. But they don’t, and so government needs to step in.
Go right ahead and try to prove that.
Well as a historical point, the welfare state, NHS, and state pensions were introduced because charity was failing to deal adequately with the social problems of the 19th and early 20th century. By and large, they have succeeded.
Clearly you’re not, because clearly you’re not doing your utmost to help those poor starving children. Right now you’re posting on an internet forum. That’s not helping the children, is it? Why aren’t you thinking of them?!
You call that proof?
Clearly you’re not, because clearly you’re not doing your utmost to help those poor starving children. Right now you’re posting on an internet forum. That’s not helping the children, is it? Why aren’t you thinking of them?
Is this the best you can manage? It’s not me who is claiming to be a saint. It’s YOU who is claiming that we would all suddenly become saints if only the government got rid of Child Benefit. A bonkers notion.
You call that proof?
It’s a corroborating argument. There is no such thing as ‘proof’ of anything, just inference to the best explanation, and claims that are contingent on available evidence.
Go right ahead and point out just where I said that. You really should try to keep things more straight in your head.
Really now? Are you sure about that?
-
All men are mortal.
-
Socrates is a man.
-
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
So you’re saying the above doesn’t prove anything? Really?
This is a non-answer. There are people who are desperately more poor in undeveloped countries. You’ve already made it a standard that no one goes hungry, so I’m asking what we do about them? What more can government do to help them right now, as people are miserably starving?
“Let’s assume you are correct (I don’t believe you are), the truth is that we do not have a free market in the sense that you are advocating, and so there still needs to be a way of providing for those that suffer under the current economic system.”
with a system based on stealing…all bets are off. all kinds of corruption can happen with that. i will never support a system that goes against the teachings of God. thou shall not steal.
i do believe the free market can handle those children much more humanely. i’ll leave it to others here to describe the how and why.
How about someone - anyone - answers the questions in my first post. What happens if you lose your job and have more than 3 kids? Or if you get a pay cut, or if your partner fucks off or dies? What happens to you and your family in any of those situations? The truth is you will not answer this question because you know it will reveal you all for what you are - callous, malevolent, and spiteful.
Retreating so soon, Consumariat? Why am I not surprised. I don’t think your retreat will last though. Clearly I (for one) am not taking your bait. So let’s try this again.
A number of things can happen, including death by starvation. Was I supposed to be afraid to say this?
If only there was a constructive conversation to retreat from, Autolykos. You are an unbearable person.
@ Consumariat
You’re a labour voter, correct?
That may be, but at least I’m not as unbearable as you.
Now let’s try this again. I’m going to keep this up until you respond. Understand?
There are no parties that represent me, Rugged. I will vote labour at the next general election just because they are not the ConDems, and I fully expect Labour to continue on with the same old Neoliberal crap that we have had for the last 30 years. All three parties are as guilty as each other.
A number of things can happen, including death by starvation. Was I supposed to be afraid to say this?
Not at all. I anticipated someone saying it.
Auto, I appreciate your insistence on a good debate, with clear definitions and such. However, not everyone is keen to subject themselves to that kind of debate (often for obvious reason, such as right now). I’ll always back your insistence on logical rigor, but I think when it comes to a point like this, it’s best to back off, as fruitful discussion seems like the least likely result.
That is just my opinion/speculation. Take it as you will.
by “back off,” I didn’t mean you shouldn’t have posed your question, just that I think posing it repeatedly in the face of Consumeriat’s defiance likely will do no good.
So where does that leave us? What point(s) were you trying to convey with your questions?
I appreciate your concern, NonAntiAnarchist, but I’m not letting go of this. I’ll bump this thread on a daily basis, calling him out on his cowardice and BS, until Hell freezes over, if need be.
Why don’t you support the communist and socialist parties? Such as the SWP, SPGB and CPGB. They claim that under socialism starvation and poverty will be eradicated. Sounds good.
Also, why do the poorest in society have the most children?