Daryl wrote:MAD-4A, I must compliment you on your polite responses under criticism.
Thank you, for the record I’ve always considered you Ausies as close cousins to us Texans.
Daryl wrote:…US has wealth inequality similar to 3d world countries, not developed countries. A right wing response would be that the land of the free enables people to prosper unhindered, and they then generate wealth for all…as this extreme distribution has steadily increased over time as new laws are passed to facilitate it, and old restrictions on corrupt business behavior are lifted. Generally it is not the hard working innovative entrepreneur generating common wealth that is benefiting from this but the manipulative stock or futures trader who doesn't generate common wealth but exploits loopholes in the system. Not a bigger cake for all, but the same cake cut less fairly.
This isn’t exactly so. It isn’t about how much more that guy has than me. In a 3rd world country (or communist country) the “poor” live in shanty shacks burning dung for light with maybe a piece of card board for a door. If you go through the “poor ghettos“ of America you don’t see the flicker of burning dung in the windows, you see the flicker of TVs and a car sitting in the drive. Despite what the liberals claim, There is very little “poor” in America. What we call “poor” is lower middle class. They have to work harder than the rich but can make it most of the time. The exception are those who refuse to work & want to live off the government dole (& YES I do know some) they are the ones who complain that they need more (don’t tell me that’s not from the same greedy self-interest). And in ANY government there will be the corrupt greedy who will try to ride the system (either poor wanting a free ride or rich wanting to be richer – that’s human nature) the difference is that with a free enterprise system the little guy stands a chance instead of a centrally controlled socialist government run by those same greedy oligarchs who can pass whatever laws they want to instead of having to work for it (and since the 19th century the US has been steadily increasing its restrictions not decreasing them)
Daryl wrote: The percentage of American citizens in the middle class is steadily shrinking, and more and more the middle class is becoming the working poor anyway, where a job is not enough for a family to survive on in dignity.
Sorry, this is erroneous. As I stated there is very little actual “poor” in America these days. The definition of “poor” is being changed to increase the % that are perceived as poor. I would be one of them as I’ve never made more than 20k in any year I’ve worked & have lived in apartments all my life with no way to purchase a house. But I still have electricity, a car TV & internet. Just because I don’t have a “new” car, a $100k house and a retirement fund doesn’t make me poor. I’m lower middle class not “poor”.
Daryl wrote: Uber rich people are using their influence with flexible congressmen to get laws passed that benefit them not the country.
Yes they are having to spend their money to “influence” political leaders. They aren’t the socialist political leaders themselves. So they have to work (& spend) at it. And if any of those leaders are found to be “flexible” & it’s proven, they tend to lose their position quite fast.
Daryl wrote: Now are you going to get a couple of buddies with your M16s into the Chevy pickup and go to Washington? Not very practical, so why keep assault weapons that are not much use for anything else?
Not for some corrupt politician passing a corrupt law, for the big picture – as Thomas Jefferson said “the great thing about the 2rd amendment is that it won’t be needed until it is.” That means that the fact that a honest law abiding citizen having a .357 in his closet is of no significant “threat” to the public. In fact some harden murdering felon having one (registered in his name) in his closet is still no real threat. He wouldn’t use the one in his name to kill someone, he’d get an illegal unregistered gun to do it with, and if suspected would point out that “his” gun doesn’t match the ballistics. And NO gun law EVER created will keep a criminal from using an ILLEAGAL gun to commit a crime (like their going to say “well I was going to rob that bank today & kill all the witnesses but having a gun is illegal, so I can’t – awww.”) Gun control laws only effect those who follow the law, NOT the criminals.
and, Mangy Fur the Smart Alick Spacecat.
But then it really happened so is not really funny.