Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Snit Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,sci.physics,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech Subject: Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2017 16:20:07 -0700 Lines: 87 Message-ID: References: <201703291311387217-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net dj6Mrk0FNsMQQe/rWXbuMQartiWwoIRW7mPeteWXqCpLt7Aq1s Cancel-Lock: sha1:GTOkkmjqMSYuxJ7ZZNGcAKZdtE8= User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.36.0.130206 Thread-Topic: Smokers are smarter, I say. Thread-Index: AdK7vvqdlY/t4jRnlEK090MRaelNhQ== Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:410650 sci.physics:630157 alt.privacy.anon-server:59106 comp.sys.mac.system:105017 alt.comp.os.windows-10:40472 alt.cellular-phone-tech:1325 On 4/22/17, 3:58 PM, in article odgn7h$r1r$1@dont-email.me, "Sprang" wrote: > On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 15:55:51 -0700, Snit, after 15 edits, wrote this: >> On 4/22/17, 2:38 PM, in article op.yy381xf2js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson >> Sword" wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 23:15:01 +0100, Snit >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/15/17, 11:16 AM, in article octo21$n2s$1@dont-email.me, "Sprang" >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> Snit is one of the dirt poor liberals that like to espouse the spending >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> other people's money. >>>>>> >>>>>> Quote? >>>>> >>>>> Well, unless you are privately funding all this shit you are for, then >>>>> that >>>>> is an entirely correct statement. >>>>> Get a child to read for you in the future. >>>> >>>> So no quote to back your claims of my views. Got it. You are just trolling >>>> for attention. >>>> >>>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work / >>>> productivity and financial gain. >>> >>> That's called "capitalism". >> >> Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the >> environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. >> With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two >> is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. > > Where do they sell human rights? Why they? We can look at extreme examples of selling slaves. Economically that worked well and in the US we even needed a war to stop it. When it was (mostly) stopped the slaves were never compensated but the slave OWNERS were. Insanity. And the focus on making money over human rights is largely what has lead to this: ----- The United States is becoming a nation of rich and poor, with few families in the middle. In this book, MIT economist Peter Temin offers an illuminating way to look at the vanishing middle class. Temin argues that American history and politics, particularly slavery and its aftermath, play an important part in the widening gap between rich and poor. Temin employs a well-known, simple model of a dual economy to examine the dynamics of the rich/poor divide in America, and outlines ways to work toward greater equality so that America will no longer have one economy for the rich and one for the poor. Many poorer Americans live in conditions resembling those of a developing country‹substandard education, dilapidated housing, and few stable employment opportunities. And although almost half of black Americans are poor, most poor people are not black. Conservative white politicians still appeal to the racism of poor white voters to get support for policies that harm low-income people as a whole, casting recipients of social programs as the Other‹black, Latino, not like "us." Politicians also use mass incarceration as a tool to keep black and Latino Americans from participating fully in society. Money goes to a vast entrenched prison system rather than to education. In the dual justice system, the rich pay fines and the poor go to jail. ----- > Is it in the cereal isle near the froot loops? Nope... that is where environmental disasters are. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.