Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15
Send Topic Print
Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth (Read 15977 times)
Pantheon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Woke

Posts: 1256
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #165 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 4:15am
 
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:49am:
Pantheon wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 9:07pm:
This is why we right wing people want a small limited government, A small limited government would not be able to interfere on the behalf of the huge corporations or lobbying groups, yet being powerful enough to created and reinforced a environment competition was ripe and regulation that benefits the large powerful corporation (which is most) was cut, helping new businesses enter the market and put pressure on these corporation to behave.

We need to return to "classical capitalism" of the 1825-1900 where corporate profits and labor’s wages had risen together, something that has never happened in socialist, communist states.


There is no such thing, you are living in a deluded fantasy world.


Coming from someone who think following the policies of the Soviet Union and Cuba to be a great idea completely ignoring the FACT that Capitalism is the only system in the recorded history that has been successful in pulling the average person above the subsistence level and sustaining a steady, if cyclical, rate of economic development.


BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:57am:
Pantheon wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 4:15pm:
The problem isn't Wealth Inequality but its Social Mobility.

Meaning?


The more you try and forcefully achieve Wealth equality the higher Wealth Inequality will become.. Just you want, welfare will be a key tool to to try and fix Wealth Inequality, the problem is, the receiver of the payments are still poor, they aren't producing anything, they are only consuming money that would of been consumed anyway.

The result is a drain on the system

I'm a great example, i'm in my prime, yet i don't work why? i'm on benefits, i have minor dyslexia and OCD which i have claimed disability allowance on and a few other things.. Now there are thousands of Australians in my position, we can work but chose not to because of the "free launch" we can get due to our minor disability.

So instead of spending money on giving out free lunches, we spend the money helping business create jobs and create programs to train workers and build valuable skills and how to start up business.

So you have a choose you can either, give out free lunches or you can spend that money on created jobs and supporting small businesses to grow (while of cause financially helping those who cant actually work) and help working family climb up the social economical ladder. As the graph shows, the smaller Wealth Inequality is, the harder it is to go from poor to middle class while the more larger Wealth Inequality shows it easier for people who are poor to go from poor to middle class as so on.

What it comes down to is do you want a unnecessary large percentage of workers doing nothing contributing nothing to society, waiting or hoping they will find a new job one day or should we get out there create those jobs and help the unemployed not to survive but to get them back into work so they can support themselves and our nation and make it a better place.

...
Back to top
 

[b][center]Socialism had been tried on every continent on earth. In light of its results, it's time to question the motives of its advocates.
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #166 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 7:59am
 
A new report uses the most recently available data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) along with the National Asset Scorecard in Communities of Color (NASCC) to highlight the current state of America’s racial wealth gap. 

Read the report HERE: http://globalpolicysolutions.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Beyond_Broke_FINAL.pdf
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #167 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 8:13am
 
When it comes to the racial gap in liquid wealth, African Americans and Latinos are nearly penniless.


Liquid wealth, that is those financial assets that can be quickly turned into cash, is largely non-existent within Black and Latino households. In fact, as of 2011, African Americans had a median liquid wealth of only $200, compared to $23,000 held by Whites and $19,500 held by Asians. Latinos didn’t fare much better, with a median liquid wealth of only $340. While the overall wealth gap remains stunning, as Whites have a median net worth over 15 times that of Blacks ($111,740 vs. $7,113), and over 13 times that of Latinos ($111,740 vs. $8,113), when it comes to liquid wealth, the disparity is even starker. The median liquid wealth of Whites is over 100 times that of Blacks and more than 65 times that
held by Latinos.

http://globalpolicysolutions.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Beyond_Broke_FINAL.pdf
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #168 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 8:45am
 
I'M 99% SURE THAT WE GOT SCREWED


You can sleep soundly, President Carter, as the mantel has been passed to President Barack Obama. http://www.islandpacket.com/2014/03/17/3007446/obama-replaces-carter-as-worst.html

Obama is worst president since WWII: poll | New York Post


It’s not the kind of history Barack Obama planned on making — but Americans now rate him as the worst president since World War II.

http://nypost.com/2014/07/02/obama-worst-president-since-wwii-poll/
Back to top
 

Trading_Places.jpg (247 KB | 18 )
Trading_Places.jpg

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
Winston Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Ministry of Truth

Posts: 1549
Oceania
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #169 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 9:26am
 
Pantheon wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 4:15am:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:49am:
Pantheon wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 9:07pm:
This is why we right wing people want a small limited government, A small limited government would not be able to interfere on the behalf of the huge corporations or lobbying groups, yet being powerful enough to created and reinforced a environment competition was ripe and regulation that benefits the large powerful corporation (which is most) was cut, helping new businesses enter the market and put pressure on these corporation to behave.

We need to return to "classical capitalism" of the 1825-1900 where corporate profits and labor’s wages had risen together, something that has never happened in socialist, communist states.


There is no such thing, you are living in a deluded fantasy world.


Coming from someone who think following the policies of the Soviet Union and Cuba to be a great idea completely ignoring the FACT that Capitalism is the only system in the recorded history that has been successful in pulling the average person above the subsistence level and sustaining a steady, if cyclical, rate of economic development.


Fallacy 1: I have never claimed that following the policies of the Soviet Union or Cuba.

Fallacy 2: Disingenuous review of Capitalism, completely ignoring externalities.

Pantheon wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 9:07pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:57am:
Pantheon wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 4:15pm:
The problem isn't Wealth Inequality but its Social Mobility.

Meaning?


The more you try and forcefully achieve Wealth equality the higher Wealth Inequality will become.. Just you want, welfare will be a key tool to to try and fix Wealth Inequality, the problem is, the receiver of the payments are still poor, they aren't producing anything, they are only consuming money that would of been consumed anyway.

The result is a drain on the system

I'm a great example, i'm in my prime, yet i don't work why? i'm on benefits, i have minor dyslexia and OCD which i have claimed disability allowance on and a few other things.. Now there are thousands of Australians in my position, we can work but chose not to because of the "free launch" we can get due to our minor disability.

So instead of spending money on giving out free lunches, we spend the money helping business create jobs and create programs to train workers and build valuable skills and how to start up business.

So you have a choose you can either, give out free lunches or you can spend that money on created jobs and supporting small businesses to grow (while of cause financially helping those who cant actually work) and help working family climb up the social economical ladder. As the graph shows, the smaller Wealth Inequality is, the harder it is to go from poor to middle class while the more larger Wealth Inequality shows it easier for people who are poor to go from poor to middle class as so on.

What it comes down to is do you want a unnecessary large percentage of workers doing nothing contributing nothing to society, waiting or hoping they will find a new job one day or should we get out there create those jobs and help the unemployed not to survive but to get them back into work so they can support themselves and our nation and make it a better place.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/80/The_Great_Gatsby_Curve....


Is there a question here somewhere?
Back to top
 

Big Brother is watching you
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #170 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 3:42pm
 
anthropologyadventures: Gallup asks people in more than 120 countries each year whether they are satisfied or dissatisfied with the freedom to choose what they do with their lives. In 2006, the U.S. ranked among the highest in the world for people reporting satisfaction with their level of freedom. After seven years and a 12-point decline, the U.S. no longer makes the top quartile worldwide.

Read More. http://www.gallup.com/poll/172019/americans-less-satisfied-freedom.aspx

    Happy Fourth of July!

http://stormedavis.tumblr.com/post/90730357763/anthropologyadventures-gallup-asks-people-in
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
ian
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 9451
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #171 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 4:28pm
 
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 11:33am:
[

Well you are telling the story, but I notice that you still haven't disputed my postion with facts in any of those cases.

You would rather attack me for exposing fallacious thinking.
You dont have a position winston other than to use multi syllabic thinly veiled personal attacks. And i didnt attack you, I made my observations of you clear.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #172 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 6:51pm
 
The best contraception is an IUD: Why I love having a coil


Felicity Morse: "It also strikes me as bizarre that the coil or IUDs intrauterine devices would be lumped together with morning-after-pills. I use one, and having swallowed, slipped and stuck my way through most other forms of contraception, can recommend the coil. I’ve found them to be one of the most effective, symptomless and after the initial insertion, hassle-free, forms of contraception."

http://blogs.artvoice.com/avdaily/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-the-corporation-cult-creeping-theocracy/

Hobby Lobby: The Corporation Cult & Creeping Theocracy


Hobby Lobby, however, is not a person and is not exercising a religion. It is a corporate entity – a legal fiction – that sells picture frames and scrapbooking supplies. It’s not a “small business”, because this craft store chain has 15,000 employees and over 550 stores nationwide. It’s a closely held corporation, meaning it has corporate status but its shares are not publicly traded. Its fictional corporate “personhood” enables Hobby Lobby to operate and enter into contracts while limiting shareholder liability. The owners of Hobby Lobby’s shares are all evangelical Christians, and they make much of that on the company’s website.

http://blogs.artvoice.com/avdaily/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-the-corporation-cult-creeping-theocracy/

Your Boss and Your Womb: A Weird Marriage of Plutocracy and Theocracy


The Greens are less vague, stating simply that they are against abortion, and contrary to medical and legal definitions, they misidentify two types of I.U.D.s and two types of emergency contraception pills, such as those commonly prescribed for rape victims, as abortifacients. I.U.D.s are an old school technology that prevents sperm cells from reaching and fertilizing eggs. Technically, abstinence does the same thing, but without the fun and passion of sex, or the ire of religious fundamentalists.

http://artvoice.com/issues/v13n27/getting_a_grip#.U7Zf-T8JCpw.google_plusone_share

David Green’s idea of Christian principles apparently includes making medical decisions for his employees. What about the important beliefs of the employees? Some of them might want to use the morning-after pill in the event of a sexual assault. Others could choose to use the forbidden IUDs not as contraception, but to treat other medical conditions such as heavy periods, chronic pelvic pain, anemia and endometreosis. For those women, their actions are perfectly moral.


http://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/opinion/editorials/2014/07/03/hobby-lobby/12189891/

Tellingly, mainstream media coverage, overall, wasn’t much better than Fox News. This was how they didn’t get it right: “Dozens of companies, including Hobby Lobby, claim religious objections to covering some or all contraceptives. The methods and devices at issue before the Supreme Court were those the plaintiffs say can work after conception.” In fact, the latest research suggests that IUDs and Plan B actually don’t work after conception. But even if they do, it’s important to remember that the scientific consensus clearly says that preventing a fertilized egg from implanting is not an abortion.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/180520/hobby-lobby-climate-change-how-media-enables-right-wings-politicization-science#

The majority of sexually active of women use contraception. The pill has the highest percentage of use, even above the male condom — which you don't need a prescription for. Even though birth control is more expensive and harder to access, four out of five women have used it. That should tell you prescribed contraception offers health benefits that condoms do not.

One of the biggest blows to women's health and reproductive freedom that came out of this ruling was how contraceptive use and family planning have been isolated from the rest of health care. Birth control has obtained a surreal status as "not just a health issue" or perhaps "a health issue that the pubic gets to weigh in on." Despite the fact that fertility and pregnancy are elements of an individual woman's health, the methods used to manage them are open to public debate and highly controversial.

http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2014/07/03/on-hobby-lobby-religious-freedom-and-sexism-in-health-care
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 4th, 2014 at 7:17pm by vikaryan »  

51960259.jpg (137 KB | 18 )
51960259.jpg

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
Postmodern Trendoid III
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 10290
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #173 - Jul 4th, 2014 at 7:01pm
 
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 1:44am:
Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:07pm:
Has wealth equality existed anywhere, at any time?

wow, the tony abbott position: who would've thought the brainiac from scholarly wonderland would've brought out that old chestnut  Cheesy Cheesy

You should do medicine dood: tons of punks out there dishing out what ever walks thru the door  Wink


In other words, you can't point to any example of where it has existed. Like most unthinking "progressives", you hear the word "equality" and believe it's the answer to all the world's problems. Yet there is no example of it achieving the utopia you desire. In fact, where it has been tried, it has resulted in millions of deaths and untold misery.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #174 - Jul 5th, 2014 at 3:56am
 
Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 7:01pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 1:44am:
Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:07pm:
Has wealth equality existed anywhere, at any time?

wow, the tony abbott position: who would've thought the brainiac from scholarly wonderland would've brought out that old chestnut  Cheesy Cheesy

You should do medicine dood: tons of punks out there dishing out what ever walks thru the door  Wink


In other words, you can't point to any example of where it has existed. Like most unthinking "progressives", you hear the word "equality" and believe it's the answer to all the world's problems. Yet there is no example of it achieving the utopia you desire. In fact, where it has been tried, it has resulted in millions of deaths and untold misery.

-->lol, the culture warrior is mis-quoting jesus christ oh here we go... change a few words and ooops culture warrior is like like like Julie Bishop or something oooooooooooooooooooooops!

Do you own an electorate full of crack smoking mummy boys or something?

oh, i smoke crack and learnt about the miracle of peter costello over prawns and crayfish through daddys facial hair at the tab  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

yeh, put it on number 5 in race number 5 son, then dog x at race blah blah boo f'n hoo johnny whatsit  Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked

yeh, real estate franchises are pure bullshit son but they separate you from your loser uncles and aunties ay son  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

... Wink Wink, ..go copper internet in the asian century yeh cos lib voters know stuff and that  Shocked Shocked ...
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #175 - Jul 5th, 2014 at 4:01am
 
Pantheon wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 4:15am:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:49am:
Pantheon wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 9:07pm:
This is why we right wing people want a small limited government, A small limited government would not be able to interfere on the behalf of the huge corporations or lobbying groups, yet being powerful enough to created and reinforced a environment competition was ripe and regulation that benefits the large powerful corporation (which is most) was cut, helping new businesses enter the market and put pressure on these corporation to behave.

We need to return to "classical capitalism" of the 1825-1900 where corporate profits and labor’s wages had risen together, something that has never happened in socialist, communist states.


There is no such thing, you are living in a deluded fantasy world.


Coming from someone who think following the policies of the Soviet Union and Cuba to be a great idea completely ignoring the FACT that Capitalism is the only system in the recorded history that has been successful in pulling the average person above the subsistence level and sustaining a steady, if cyclical, rate of economic development.


BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:57am:
Pantheon wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 4:15pm:
The problem isn't Wealth Inequality but its Social Mobility.

Meaning?


The more you try and forcefully achieve Wealth equality the higher Wealth Inequality will become.. Just you want, welfare will be a key tool to to try and fix Wealth Inequality, the problem is, the receiver of the payments are still poor, they aren't producing anything, they are only consuming money that would of been consumed anyway.

The result is a drain on the system

I'm a great example, i'm in my prime, yet i don't work why? i'm on benefits, i have minor dyslexia and OCD which i have claimed disability allowance on and a few other things.. Now there are thousands of Australians in my position, we can work but chose not to because of the "free launch" we can get due to our minor disability.

So instead of spending money on giving out free lunches, we spend the money helping business create jobs and create programs to train workers and build valuable skills and how to start up business.

So you have a choose you can either, give out free lunches or you can spend that money on created jobs and supporting small businesses to grow (while of cause financially helping those who cant actually work) and help working family climb up the social economical ladder. As the graph shows, the smaller Wealth Inequality is, the harder it is to go from poor to middle class while the more larger Wealth Inequality shows it easier for people who are poor to go from poor to middle class as so on.

What it comes down to is do you want a unnecessary large percentage of workers doing nothing contributing nothing to society, waiting or hoping they will find a new job one day or should we get out there create those jobs and help the unemployed not to survive but to get them back into work so they can support themselves and our nation and make it a better place.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/80/The_Great_Gatsby_Curve....

so, you were talking about 'social mobility' I believe.. (are you over 90 yo or something?)...  Cool
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
Winston Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Ministry of Truth

Posts: 1549
Oceania
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #176 - Jul 5th, 2014 at 9:05am
 
ian wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 4:28pm:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 11:33am:
[

Well you are telling the story, but I notice that you still haven't disputed my postion with facts in any of those cases.

You would rather attack me for exposing fallacious thinking.
You dont have a position winston other than to use multi syllabic thinly veiled personal attacks. And i didnt attack you, I made my observations of you clear.


My latest position in relation to you is rejecting your assertion that I somehow use faux intellectualism and flowery vocabulary to win arguments.

I will also add that it is not a personal attack to question the cognitive ability of someone who appears to become completely incapable of coherent communication when questioned on their reasoning.

It's clear to me your observations are based on personal frustration at my intolerance to attitudes and opinions based on misinformation or malignant lies.
Back to top
 

Big Brother is watching you
 
IP Logged
 
Winston Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Ministry of Truth

Posts: 1549
Oceania
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #177 - Jul 5th, 2014 at 9:09am
 
vikaryan wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 6:51pm:
The best contraception is an IUD: Why I love having a coil


Felicity Morse: "It also strikes me as bizarre that the coil or IUDs intrauterine devices would be lumped together with morning-after-pills. I use one, and having swallowed, slipped and stuck my way through most other forms of contraception, can recommend the coil. I’ve found them to be one of the most effective, symptomless and after the initial insertion, hassle-free, forms of contraception."

http://blogs.artvoice.com/avdaily/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-the-corporation-cult-creeping-theocracy/

Hobby Lobby: The Corporation Cult & Creeping Theocracy


Hobby Lobby, however, is not a person and is not exercising a religion. It is a corporate entity – a legal fiction – that sells picture frames and scrapbooking supplies. It’s not a “small business”, because this craft store chain has 15,000 employees and over 550 stores nationwide. It’s a closely held corporation, meaning it has corporate status but its shares are not publicly traded. Its fictional corporate “personhood” enables Hobby Lobby to operate and enter into contracts while limiting shareholder liability. The owners of Hobby Lobby’s shares are all evangelical Christians, and they make much of that on the company’s website.

http://blogs.artvoice.com/avdaily/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-the-corporation-cult-creeping-theocracy/

Your Boss and Your Womb: A Weird Marriage of Plutocracy and Theocracy


The Greens are less vague, stating simply that they are against abortion, and contrary to medical and legal definitions, they misidentify two types of I.U.D.s and two types of emergency contraception pills, such as those commonly prescribed for rape victims, as abortifacients. I.U.D.s are an old school technology that prevents sperm cells from reaching and fertilizing eggs. Technically, abstinence does the same thing, but without the fun and passion of sex, or the ire of religious fundamentalists.

http://artvoice.com/issues/v13n27/getting_a_grip#.U7Zf-T8JCpw.google_plusone_share

David Green’s idea of Christian principles apparently includes making medical decisions for his employees. What about the important beliefs of the employees? Some of them might want to use the morning-after pill in the event of a sexual assault. Others could choose to use the forbidden IUDs not as contraception, but to treat other medical conditions such as heavy periods, chronic pelvic pain, anemia and endometreosis. For those women, their actions are perfectly moral.


http://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/opinion/editorials/2014/07/03/hobby-lobby/12189891/

Tellingly, mainstream media coverage, overall, wasn’t much better than Fox News. This was how they didn’t get it right: “Dozens of companies, including Hobby Lobby, claim religious objections to covering some or all contraceptives. The methods and devices at issue before the Supreme Court were those the plaintiffs say can work after conception.” In fact, the latest research suggests that IUDs and Plan B actually don’t work after conception. But even if they do, it’s important to remember that the scientific consensus clearly says that preventing a fertilized egg from implanting is not an abortion.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/180520/hobby-lobby-climate-change-how-media-enables-right-wings-politicization-science#

The majority of sexually active of women use contraception. The pill has the highest percentage of use, even above the male condom — which you don't need a prescription for. Even though birth control is more expensive and harder to access, four out of five women have used it. That should tell you prescribed contraception offers health benefits that condoms do not.

One of the biggest blows to women's health and reproductive freedom that came out of this ruling was how contraceptive use and family planning have been isolated from the rest of health care. Birth control has obtained a surreal status as "not just a health issue" or perhaps "a health issue that the pubic gets to weigh in on." Despite the fact that fertility and pregnancy are elements of an individual woman's health, the methods used to manage them are open to public debate and highly controversial.

http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2014/07/03/on-hobby-lobby-religious-freedom-and-sexism-in-health-care


Oh I can see corporate lawyers in the future trying to assert that corporations are a reflection of the living word, the natural process of evolution like the nucleated cells or multi-cellular organisms and their rights MUST be observed.

We are well on our way on the journey into various nighmare scenarios.
Back to top
 

Big Brother is watching you
 
IP Logged
 
Winston Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Ministry of Truth

Posts: 1549
Oceania
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #178 - Jul 5th, 2014 at 9:13am
 
Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 7:01pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 1:44am:
Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 8:07pm:
Has wealth equality existed anywhere, at any time?

wow, the tony abbott position: who would've thought the brainiac from scholarly wonderland would've brought out that old chestnut  Cheesy Cheesy

You should do medicine dood: tons of punks out there dishing out what ever walks thru the door  Wink


In other words, you can't point to any example of where it has existed. Like most unthinking "progressives", you hear the word "equality" and believe it's the answer to all the world's problems. Yet there is no example of it achieving the utopia you desire. In fact, where it has been tried, it has resulted in millions of deaths and untold misery.


Where has it been tried where it wasn't being constantly sabotaged?
Back to top
 

Big Brother is watching you
 
IP Logged
 
ian
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 9451
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #179 - Jul 5th, 2014 at 9:15am
 
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 5th, 2014 at 9:05am:
ian wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 4:28pm:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 3rd, 2014 at 11:33am:
[

Well you are telling the story, but I notice that you still haven't disputed my postion with facts in any of those cases.

You would rather attack me for exposing fallacious thinking.
You dont have a position winston other than to use multi syllabic thinly veiled personal attacks. And i didnt attack you, I made my observations of you clear.


My latest position in relation to you is rejecting your assertion that I somehow use faux intellectualism and flowery vocabulary to win arguments.

I will also add that it is not a personal attack to question the cognitive ability of someone who appears to become completely incapable of coherent communication when questioned on their reasoning.

It's clear to me your observations are based on personal frustration at my intolerance to attitudes and opinions based on misinformation or malignant lies.

As well as being fat and weak you are a faux intellectual winston.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15
Send Topic Print