This Hannity guy is stupid. Really stupid, he got nothing on him. You americans are really stupid for thinking that socialism has something to do with comunism. its stupid to even think that and this hannity is really stupid. fox broadcasters are stupid
Moore the useless turd doesn't even know what capitalism really is. He is so stupid that he doesn't know the difference between capitalism and corporatism. Capitalism is honest business and being successful from serving his customers like Moore does (selling retarded documentaries) Corporatism is when Obama steals all of our cash and gives it to the banks, GM and Solyndra for his own political agenda then claims to only want to help the poor. Ron Paul 2012 for real capitalism and liberty!!!
Hey i'm watching the most racist network on earth. Fox news nazi republican propaganda. Hey rupert murdoch is trying to pass sopa bill because he does not want youtube videos that contradict his bias news network fox news. People they hate youtube videos like: fox attacks black america or fox attacks obama. Hey fox news are racist and only support republicans. They are nazi republican republican propaganda. boo. Fuck rupert murdoch and his empire of media. He wants net neutrality fuck him.
Why are you so hang up on the fact that Moore is rich? Don't thing about him as being rich, listen to the things he is asking... I do not support him 100% in everything but He dose make some good points. Read up on Karl Marx and his theory of communism and then say something. It is not smart to talk trash about something if you don't truly understand or don't know. Saying shit about something dose not make you smart it makes you look close-minded and dumb.
Moore is a fuckin fool he stands for occupy wall street but has a mil.dollar vacation home pfft fuckin faggot hes a fuckin snake and idiots who watch his movies are getting him rich he wants to distribute wealth well hit me up fuckin stupid walrus
what i hate is that i don't think that bush or cheney or hannity are conservative, they aren't fiscal conservative, they have a twisted moral conservatism, anti gay rights,. These neo cons are revolutionary in their twisted philosophy
In my defense the condemnation of religion is not to say many ideas are not worthwhile but to say the practice of religion (organized) has fallen short and we need to apply perhaps many ideals and move past superstition.
I understand the reference however he also claims his own affinity for the ideology in discussion. We are far from tribal and our justice system relies and revolves, evolves, in a secular application
Hannity isn't the one trashing the system that allowed him to earn that money, Moore is, that is the difference. I don't like Sean Hannity, but I think he has a point on this one.
@TerryComo2010 ya he is rich, but he has nothing against himself been rich, moore says everyone should be equal yet he is very rich, moore is the hipocrate in that respect.
@TerryComo2010 That's what you liberals don't understand, you don't see the point, Hannity isn't trashing the system OR trashing Moore about making money, yes they are both rich, but Moore is bitching about the same system that made him successful, it just seems kind of counter intuitive and out of place, Hannity isn't complaining about our system at all. Hannity is complaining about how Moore complains about our system. I don't expect you to understand this though, it can be a confusing topic.
@xXxDANMANxXx You Republicans are the dumbest shits of all time. You voted in the most stupid, moronic, evil and scumbag of a president (GW Bush) this country ever had. You are now trying to give us Perry, (stupider than Palin), Ron Paul (a certified idoit and alzheimers patient) and Romney (an overblown scumbag 1% carpetbagger, vulture capitalist). You and your ilk have brought this country to it's knees. Hope your enjoy it because it's an Obama landslide coming this November!
@TerryComo2010 Because Obama is so much better than Bush huh? This country is a welfare state thanks to that clown racking in more debt than all presidents combined. I could shit out a better economy than you're best friend Osama, oh my bad, OBAMA.... You're the most narrow minded left wing cock I've ever witnessed. I don't want Perry, I want Ron Paul. If Obama gets re-elected, America WILL fail, we're on the brink of bankruptcy because of him. Fuck your welfare mentality bitch
@xXxDANMANxXx This is my last retort, (yes I will let you look it up in the dictionary), to your stupidity. The mess we are in is because of Bush, not Obama. The deficit is from two wars, one illegal, and neither paid for! IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead of paying for the wars, he gave the 1% tax cuts! Bush was, is and will be put down in history as the dumbest shit of a President this country ever had. Enjoy November!
@TerryComo2010 is this what they teach in middle schools now? Ever heard of the credit crisis? Obama Care? The fucking bail outs? Bullshit green energy that obama spends our money on? And you think the economy is fucked from Bush? HAHAH YOU'RE SUCH A FUCKING RETARD. That was 4 years ago bitch, bush tax cuts were for everyone, not just the top %1, find something better to bitch about then the "evil" top %1 because that's all you jealous whining liberals do. Get a life and educate yourself dumbass
@xXxDANMANxXx The economy has been fucked since Nixon took the currency off the Gold standard in 71. Then all politicians with the help of the FEDeral reserve have been creating bubbles in the economy by messing about with the interest rates and printing lots of cheap money. Freddie and Fannie/ government backed bank accounts and mortgages have all trashed the economy. Republicans and democrats are exactly the same. We need Ron Paul to end the corruption and restore capitalism. Honest business!
@xXxDANMANxXx The economy was really fucked when Bush took over, then Obama got a worse economy and he has trashed it more than anyone in American History. There is no two party system. There is only one party all wanting bigger government, higher taxes, more wars and more control of our lives. We need real capitalism back where real success is created by serving customers not stealing from the tax payers. Ron Paul will end the IRS and income taxes and stop the bailouts and green energy shit!
@TerryComo2010 it must be so easy to be a juvenile from left field, if there's a problem, you blame it on the right. It's never your party (which, in fact it always is) but it's always the right. 30 years from now when the economy is all fine and dandy because obama won't get reelected and we'll get someone in office with a brain and knows how our system works, you'll still be that one guy saying how bad it is because you're too lazy to get a job. Start making your "end is near" posters now haha
@TerryComo2010 He's pointing out the hypocrisy of Moore's position, one that he doesn't share. People watching this video must be complete retards to vote up a comment that spells hypocrite with an 'A'
@TerryComo2010 He wasn't trashing him for making money he was trashing him for making huge amounts of money from capitalism. Then he goes and makes a movie about how terrible capitalism and how disgraceful it is that people are making huge amounts of money while the average american is poor. That is being an ultimate hypocrite!! On Piers Morgan show Moore denied that he was a millionaire. He has made over $50m from his movies and won't even admit it, so he can be an occupier at wall street.
@TerryComo2010 He's not a hypocrite for saying that. Hannity believes that you should be able to make as much money as you can. He's claiming that Moore is a hypocrite for making money off of movies that promote the opposite.
@frost1947 the point he's trying to make, as i understand it, is that many politicians praise themselves for being devoted christians, but when it comes to actually following the word of christ - you know all that socialist talk of feeding the hungry and selling your possessions and giving it to the poor :) - they don't do it and instead give tax cuts to the rich and cut services for the poor.
@frost1947 A lot of democrats/liberals are religious, despite what the right wing media leads you to believe. Atheists and agnostics are VERY rare. Jesus was actually very liberal if you read much of the new testament. But I agree with you.... I'm agnostic myself. Until we can prove any religion is true I won't believe in any of it. Until then, I guess I'll just have to be happy with going to hell (because every religious person thinks I will).
Good tit for tat video, Sean Hannity and Michael Moore are a good match. I'd say the outcome is equal, but it's nice to see liberals and conservatives in friendly debate.
@StraightFashionMan People are liberal until their first paycheck goes to people too incompetent to support themselves. As Churchill said, a conservative before the age of 30 doesn't have a heart, a liberal after the age of 30 doesn't have a brain.
The fact that Moore is a millionaire means nothing. He believes than taxes should be RAISED on the wealthiest Americans, while Sean Hannity and his greedy, corporate pig buddies don't. If you think raising taxes on corporations by 2% is communism, then you are an IDIOT. Middle and Lower class Americans pay about 33-35% income taxes. Corporations and the rich, after all the loopholes, pay as little as 1% (even though they're officially supposed to pay about 30%).
@jcdntn55 Yes, and a flat tax with no loop holes would take care of this. I still believe in the capital system, but bailing out the bankers was B.S. While they vacationed on the beach in San Diego my family lost their livelihood, my job, our home, my retirement, my health insurance, my life insurance, and now my health is failing. 1/3 of my income took care of my mortgage and monthly living expenses. I was responsible. Now I have a McJob. Down with Barack and Michelle 'let them eat cake' Obama.
@jcdntn55 Well said. The top 5% of Americans make 95% of the money. The bottom 95% fight over the remaining 5%. Is this right? I have a full time 40 hour a week job and I had to move back in with my parents to support the cost of living. I am a college graduate, teaching children, and I live with my parents. Explain that.
@duurg amen. You're not the only one that had to move back in with their parents. I did, and so did millions of other americans thanks to far-right republican policies and the failure of democrats to stop them. I fear the only way out now is to do what the founding fathers did..... if you get what I mean.
Hannity takes the 911 Commission as the "word". He questions nothing? Smug be thy name.
Real intelligence can listen to both side without anger. As a long time Republican, guys like Hannity disgust me. Discussion and understanding is the way to freedom.
@witzerdog LOL, you contradict yourself in saying that "long time Republican guys" have nothing to bring to the table. Does not sound like you really care to understand their opinion. What type of freedom are you talking about? The freedom to think the same way you do?
@Kintercept I'm saying I am a long time Republican. I think guys like Hannity and O'Reilly give the party a bad name by being polarizing, inflammatory and unwilling to reason/change/ or listen if someone labels themselves a Democrat.
@freezerburns12 He looks down when asked about his wealth and seems ashamed. Inside every liberal is a capitalist dieing to get out, just look at 9-holes Obama these days.
@Kintercept Can you blame Americans for the American dream? Everyone hopes to one day achieve success... To provide for ones children. Looking down seems more humble than covering a secret.
America could cut "defence" spending by multi-billions and it would still have the best military in the world by far ! Wake up America - your military industrial complex's grip on everything is not a good thing !
When I talk about principles I mean that providing service is the fairest way to get rich as long as it is voluntary at all levels then no 3rd party should have any say if they are not being harmed against their will.I think stealing is wrong, no matter who the goods go to!Even if 51% vote that it ok.Gang rape is no better than ordinary rape even if it is democratic! I love charity because if I don't agree with what they do I take my money away.Most people in a free society would help each other
@Freedomnotforced The reason why democracy is the fairest system, is because society is an illusion. In nature, everything is owned, and shared, by every other person in the world. We create a society under the assumption that it will be better for everyone involved, and if it is not, the society is unjust. Those are the principles that are behind democracy. I think we have seen, that people will not donate enough to charity, and churches simply cannot handle it.
@aaronshoup So the government passing a law requiring black people to sit at the back of the bus and give up their seat to a white person is a good way around racism? Most racism was backed by laws and it wasn't until those laws were revoked that racism started to disappear. Personally I would rather let a racist be racist and then I would know which people I did not want to do business with. Most business people are too greedy to be racist as it hurts business, not help it.
@Freedomnotforced Jim Crow laws were passed because people wanted them. I agree that "Plessy", was decided incorrectly, but it is not as though the government created racism. Racism has a long and ugly history in this country. Business owners today, primarily in the south, are still racist, and use symbolism to keep minorities out of their businesses. The people there think it is just fine.
@aaronshoup No one believes in democracy as an absolute, if 51% vote to shoot the other 49% that does not make it right. The same as when 51% vote to steal from 10% that does not make it right. A simple majority is fine for some simple matters but not determining individual liberties. BTW America was built on the idea of being a republic not a democracy. The founders did not like democracy because they know that the powers are abused by the majority and the minority has rights too.
@Freedomnotforced Of course we do not live in a "direct democracy", however we also do not have a classical "republic" either. Our representatives are democratically elected, and we have protections for the minority.
@aaronshoup before government intervention america had the greatest level of charity ever seen in the world. Health care was more affordable and poor people did not get turned away. There is no system that benefits the poor and eliminates poverty better than the free market. Communist China had a living standard 20-1 worse than americans when it was communist and america was free. Now that america is more socialist and china is more capitalist it is almost 5-1.
@Freedomnotforced Actually, at the founding of the country, when George Washington was president, we had a crisis, and it was clear that the churches were not capable of providing for the poor. At that time the U.S. started making welfare payments to people, and we have never looked back. I honestly think however, that the best welare program is a good job. That is really what we need to be focused on. China!? Examples of totalitarian regimes? Yeah they live a lot worse.
@aaronshoup The minimum wage when it was introduced in South Africa was mostly supported by white labour unions who would never have a black person in their union. Black workers would offer to work for 1/4 of what unions demanded and so they took the jobs from the whites. Then the unions made it law for companies to pay higher wages to eliminate the competition. Low skilled workers lost their only weapon which was to offer to work for less. Minimum wage is the most racist law in the country!
@Freedomnotforced The right to work for less. Hell, we are basically there now. When I lived in Florida I worked for 6$/hr, in 2010. It is going to be difficult to make me believe that working for less is really desireable. Corporations are posting record profits, they are hoarding money, sometimes paying no taxes. The truth of course, is that the only power that low skilled workers have is in numbers, like in a union.
In a free market we are paid in direct proportion to how replaceable we are. If no one else can do our job then we can push up the wages just to the point at which a company still makes a profit on our skills. Every person is either selling products or services and they need to bid against the other people offering the same products or services.Whoever offers the best quality at the lowest price gets the contract.That is the fairest way to doit otherwise how would we decide who getsthe contract?
@Freedomnotforced I remember Rand Paul, arguing that no business owner would be racist, because it would hurt his business. And yet, there are business owners that are racist. Of course people could choose to do business with someone else, but the amount of transparency that would be required, simply makes that impossible.
@Freedomnotforced That is largely true, however if the average worker makes 3$/hr than a person with desireable skills will make 10$. If the average makes 30$/hr, than they will make 100$. I agree with you, however, what about the guy with an 85 iq? Should he just die? Or work for 1$/hr? Your system is great for people that are born into great wealth, but not everyone can be rich. It is the nature of the system. Again, this is fine, but how far down is the bottom?
@aaronshoup If you create your own world you can work in ideal situation, but this world we need to work in realities. You need to decide if you would rather have 100% of the people having opportunities to work at low wages or you can have 20% of people working at artificially high wages and the other 80% out of work.When I was homeless I would rather have had a low paying job that was easy to get into than no job at all.
@Freedomnotforced There seem to be some unfounded assumptions underlying your arguments. #1 the rich/corporations are not making lots of money. #2 wages are higher, and #3 that productivity is down. All three of these are demonstrably untrue. Productivity has gone up tremendously, particularly during the recession, corporations are making record profits, and wages are them same as they were in 1980.
@aaronshoup 80% of millionaires in the USA are first generation wealth. In centrally planned economies almost all of the rich were 3rd, 4th, 5th generation wealth. Free markets have a massive amount of economic mobility between income classes. 80% of people who were in the bottom 20% of income in 1970 are now in the top 50%. This is not because of unions, but despite the harm unions do. Ford was the first person in history to pay employees $5 per day and that was without unions.
@Freedomnotforced We reached peak wages in '67, and we had 35% union membership. Today we have 9% and wages are half of what they were then. I think that you set up a "straw man" when you argue against "centrally planned economies", and pretend as though that is the system that I am in favor of.
@aaronshoup Unions are the most racist group there have ever been. They hate competition from minorities so they passed a wage law that priced them out of the market. They are for equality as long as it is their group who are the most equal. They sold the minimum wage law to the public as something that would help the low skilled minorities because the evil businessmen were exploiting them by hiring them for low wages, but really they just wanted to keep their own jobs safe.
@aaronshoup The economy is either run by the people or run by the state. You may say that a mixture is best, but that is only best for special interest groups like wall street, politicians and union members. We either have politicians messing up the market giving special favours or we don't. A mix is probably the worst. At least with a centrally planned economy everyone (except government workers) knows they are going to be screwed. In a mix economy it is a lottery who gets helped or screwed
@Freedomnotforced The economy ran great for a long time. We had no bubbles, just long, gradual growth. What, besides everyone buying into your ideology, do you think would prevent the rich from using their wealth to get special favors from the government? We have been talking about this for weeks, and you seem to think that if we all just say "no", then the rich will not use their money to influence government. I don't get it.
I am not pro rich. I am pro freedom. I want to stop government from handing out favours to the rich and anyone else. When we take away the power of government to hand out favours then there is no one to influence. You keep talking like I want the rich to buy the government by taking the power of government away. You want to give the government more power to make laws and then the rich have more of an incentive to influence it. If they can make laws in the market they cant sell favours!
@aaronshoup The government did not mess with the market significantly until 1913. Up to that time there were only minor expansions and contractions like every industry will go through. It is natural. But when the government interfered then the downturns got longer and more severe. The federal reserve was set up to stop banks failing when there was a run. They let over 600 banks fail before they stepped in to help out. This is what caused the great depression.
@Freedomnotforced Actually the U.S. economy went through 6 month boom and bust cycles all through the 19th century. Major bank failures were common, this, and keeping unemployment low, is why the federal reserve was set up. I am not in favor of the fed, and I think it should be nationalized. But the economy crashed in the 20's because taxes were reduced on the rich, and after about 6 or 7 years, they have bought everything that they are going to buy.
@aaronshoup 1921, 22, 23 tax cuts, and more importantly they created a capital gains tax. 1929 we had the crash. 1981 and a crash in 87. 2001 and a crash in 08. It is just how it works. When it is more beneficial for people to take wealth out of their businesses, they do. The rich do not make good consumers, because they only by so many mansions, and then they stop consuming.
@aaronshoup Then the new deal policies prolonged the depression. They took the capital away from the people who would buy assets and set up new businesses that would have turned the economy around. They stole the money from the producers and gave it to people who consumed it. When you do this of course the economy cannot recover. Giving people useless jobs helps temporarily but depletes much needed resources to boost industry. The great depression would have been a minor recession if left alone
@Freedomnotforced Investment happens second. First, you need demand, then comes investment. When there is no demand, the rich will not invest, because there is no reason to believe that you will get your investment back. Right now there is weak demand, and banks are taking money from the fed, and investing in T-bills. That way they earn 2% on their money, pay .01% in interest back to the fed, and pocket the difference.
So far we know you don't like free market (which created the greatest increase in standard of life for the average person in history 1776-1913) you don't like centrally planned economies and you don't like the current system which is a mix (government taking 45% of income and spending it) What else is there? What system do you want? You haven't yet said anything about the system you want, so maybe you could tell me which you think is the best?
@Freedomnotforced Actually that is not true. We have never seen free-markets, and we never will. Our economy has never been a "free-market" economy. There are always rules in any social encounter, and there is always a power structure.
@aaronshoup You seem to promote the same idea that 'those people' from other countries shouldn't be allowed to take american jobs because we deserve them just because we were born in a better country. Lets make a law to stop foreign workers competing because they are being offered jobs at low wages and we can't compete - "I mean they are being exploited" (wink wink) Lets help the poor by keeping manufacturing jobs away from them and send them back to begging, clearing trash, starving and misery.
@Freedomnotforced I never said any of that. We should protect American jobs, because that is best for us. It is also not beneficial to people in other countries to have their domestic industries destroyed, just so they can receive a sub-substance level job. We have seen this all over the world.
@aaronshoup That is what the unions said too. We should protect our jobs because that is best for us. So lets not give the other people a chance. We can block them out with guns because they are being exploited. But I guess you are right, you wouldn't want to ruin all the high paying begging and trash clearing jobs. That would be horrendous!
@Freedomnotforced What do you think our military uses when they go into small countries and force them to do what we want, on behalf of the rich? Help small countries build economies that make them more self reliant, not economies that cause people to be dependent on sub-subsistence level jobs.
@Freedomnotforced NAFTA completely destroyed Haiti's domestic rice industry. Europe, and the U.S. have forced (through domestic policy) South American countries into an economy (which is the same as their colonial history) where they export natural resources, and import goods. This type of system is exploitation. Have you ever seen video of the places where Walmart workers live in China? They keep them in dark dorms, and charge them whether they use them or not.
I don't know much about nafta, but free trade means everyone has a chance to compete.Equal opportunities for all. Not equality of results but equality of competition. Every form of protectionism helps one groups but artificially harms another. It is always easier to see who is being helped directly but not so easy to see the millions who are being harmed by being blocked out of the market place. In a free market wal mart could not force anything on anyone unless they agree to the terms
@Freedomnotforced I love arguing with libertarians. Largely because I know that you are sincere. However, I think that libertarians live in a world of ideas, and never really deal with reality. Every country has a different situation. Different living costs, different industries, different values. Putting a highly subsidized industry, up against small farmers, in a third world country does no one any good. Not good for farmers, taxpayers, governments, no one. Just the rich
@aaronshoup You are so far off on so many points I actually feel embarrassed for you! Nationalise the FED? lol I didn't know it was a private business? lol :) Crash happened because the taxes were reduced? Income tax (16th amendment) was introduced in 1913 before that Government spending never went over 10% of GNP. Less to spend less harm they can do! 6 month boom and bust is not a problem. 10 year depressions caused and prolonged by government is a problem.
@Freedomnotforced Actually none of what you just said is true. The Federal Reserve Bank is a group of privately owned banks. The board is mainly made up of presidential appointments. However, the FED is private. The top marginal income tax in 1921 was 73%, and was reduced to 25%, in increments, from 1922 until 1925.
The rich had bought everything they were going to buy? What are you smoking? What stops government being influenced? The fact that they don't take 45% of the nations income and decide who to give it to. Do you think there would be 1000's of lobbyists if there was not a big pot to be handed out and if we did not let politicians hand out favours. If the pot was not there then there is nothing to influence.If the government can't mess with the market why would you want to influence them?
@Freedomnotforced The government does not take 45% of the nations income. The government takes about 26% of GDP, which is about 1/2 of what Europe does. However, the percentage seems superfluous. As long as there are rule makers, how do you stop big business from trying to influence them. Without making influencing them illegal, and take away the incentive.
@Freedomnotforced I want private industry to handle as much as possible. Public services need to be handled by the government, regardless of inefficiencies, to ensure that they are fairly administered.
Going to publicly funded campaigns, and making all political contributions illegal would get rid of most of the corruption. We already have the infrastructure, pbs, npr, etc., could air debates. They could talk about issues, rather than mudslinging, because the funding would not be there.
@Freedomnotforced I want private industry to handle as much as possible. Public services need to be handled by the government, regardless of inefficiencies, to ensure that they are fairly administered.
Going to publicly funded campaigns, and making all political contributions illegal would get rid of most of the corruption. We already have the infrastructure, pbs, npr, etc., could air debates. They could talk about issues, rather than mudslinging, because the funding would not be there.
@aaronshoup You are basically saying that - if we stop the thief from stealing how are we going to stop people buying the goods he steals? By him not having goods there is nothing to buy!!!!!!! Let's let him steal more because that will stop people buying the stolen goods because we can get a thief who just wants to give the goods to us! And he can block minorities and poor people out of the market to keep our jobs. Still you have not made a valid complaint about the free market?
@aaronshoup Of course taxing people to live in the society is not stealing. We need to pay for defence, police, courts, street services and some admin costs. That is completely fair and no one would disagree with paying for that. What is stealing is when money is taken from one person by force and given to another. Spreading the wealth around as Obama says is theft. Taking from people who use it to produce and giving it to people for consumption is destructive to a society.
@aaronshoup The thing I like most about libertarians is that they have a moral code that is consistent. Whatever moral code you run is insane. It does not have any logic. You criticise racism then want to keep poor people of a different race out of the work force by law to keep your job. You think that stealing is ok if it has a noble purpose. If I break into your house and steal your belongings is it no longer theft if I give it to a poor person?
@Freedomnotforced A moral code that is consistent, is not necessarily good, just because it is consistent. You seem to confuse morality, and politics. Morality is how you deal with people on an individual basis, politics are the rules by which we run a society. I think that if you got what you wanted, you wouldn't want it any more. The most important thing is that everyone eats, not that some are billionaires.
I'm not going to defend Fox as to be honest I have only really seen Stossell and O'Reilly. Stossell is a libertarian so I love his programme and he is pro freedom and consistent with his views, and believes that america should stick to the principles of the founders and the constitution. But saying CNN presents news without opinion is a joke. I heard much more about Occupy than I did the Tea Party. I guess the libertarians show the stupidity of Occupy and Socialist do the same with the tea party
@aaronshoup A moral code that is not consistent is not a moral code. It is just based on whims and whatever we think is best at the time, that is dangerous. Like it is ok to be a racist or a thief when it benefits us. If you study British History you will see that clearly when the taxes are reduced GDP increases and so does tax revenue.
@Freedomnotforced That is correct, about a moral code. My moral code is consistent. However, clearly our political philosophy cannot be the same as our moral code. For instance, the military kills people, with legitimacy, because they are under civilian rule. They are legitimate, because of the flag on their shoulders. Reduced income taxes, in this country, have never produced more tax revenue. Alan Greenspan is an objectivist.
@aaronshoup How do you distinguish between public and private funding? The public is made up of private individuals. We actually agree on most things. But, not spread the wealth mentality, the idea of what public services should be and foreign trade policies. I am more of a global person and believe all men were created equal and deserve a fair chance no matter where they were born.
@Freedomnotforced The difference between public and private funding, is that all candidates, regardless of party, as long as they have a set percentage of votes, would receive the same amount of money to campaign with. Private funding would be illegal. I don't think that it is fair that one person has more political power, because they have more money, than another.
@Freedomnotforced I disagree that public radio and tv are liberal. They are both funded by private corporations, as are all of the media outlets. The mainstream media is very conservative, and of course Fox is almost fascist in their outlook. There are some news shows that are liberal, but all you have to do is look at the way that the media treated the "occupy" movement, to see the conservative bias. Nobody knew why they were there? What they were doing?
@aaronshoup Way off on the Fox comment. If you watched people like John Stossell he speaks truth and lets everyone have their say. His moral code is consistent throughout. CNN etc is just about fairness, which is all subjective and impossible to live by because you never know what everyone thinks is fair. Fox presenters more than anyone follow the constitution and the true values of America (except O Reilly, I can't stand him. He is a racist war monger)
@Freedomnotforced No, Fox news confuses the news, by weaving opinion, and news, to create a mess. CNN is about presenting the news, without opinion. All of the news agencies, however, is owned by multi-national corporations. If you think that they are liberal, I think you are crazy. Studies show that Fox news viewers are the most uninformed of all other media viewers.
@aaronshoup The same bias that happens with occupy is happening with the Tea party. They all find the most lunatic people at each rally and say that they speak for the whole lot. But that gets ratings. With mobs you will always get genuine people out to get a solution and nutters because they are just angry and have nothing better to do than cause trouble.
@Freedomnotforced I agree with part of that. However, the tea party had 500 people, and every news outlet was present. The occupy people had 20,000 and I would ask friends/family what they thought, and they hadn't even heard about the protests.
The income tax in 1862 was just for the war, not in peace time. All rules change for war. We never had a great depression anytime until the taxes were raised. The idea that tax cuts caused the depression is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Lower taxes does increase revenue. You can study all countries through history and that is the case. High taxes destroys incentives to produce. Creating penalties for production and paying people not to work destroys countries economic growth.
@Freedomnotforced Alan Greenspan testified in front of congress during the summer of 2010. He was asked whether lower taxes have resulted in higher revenues, and after some evasive answers, he finally answered, "no they do not". There has never been a time, with the exception of capital gains taxes, when lower rates have ever yielded higher revenues. The economy was very good when taxes were high. We have had recessions since the beginning of time.
When the state runs the economy and redistributes the wealth do you think it stops people from starving? Starvation in America is probably about 100 per year at most. USSR, Eastern Europe, North Korea, China had millions and millions of people starve to death in the 20th century, so again the facts are against you. Free markets prevent poverty and increase all levels of income better than any system in history. When people are not having their wealth stolen then give much more to charity.
@Freedomnotforced Wow, is that our bench mark? Starvation? My goodness. The reason why people don't starve to death in this country, is because of our social safety net. However, there was starvation during the Great Depression, and there was significant starvation during the 19th century.
@aaronshoup Just wanted to say that I had never really watched any shows on Fox except Stossel and Judge Napolianto. They are great shows. You talked about Fox viewers being the most misinformed. After watching some of their programmes during the presidential campaign, I think you understated how misinformed their viewers are. Fox is the worst news station in the world, closely followed by CNN. Pack of absolute retards with the most bias and corrupt coverage ever imagined. Absolute knobheads
@aaronshoup America had the closest thing to a free market that has ever been seen in a country with such a large population and the lack of restriction created innovation and wealth like never seen before. Tax cuts did not create the depression and that doesn't make sense. But I concede the point about the FED. Government takes much closer to 45% than 26% when you take in all revenue sources including inflation from printing money.
@aaronshoup The 45% figure came from the political debates. The official figure both sides use is 39% but the inflation figure is debatable because they won't admit the true figure. They say it is about 5-6% but when you compare the dollar price to products such as oil, silver, gold, food etc then it is really about 15-25%. I just got prices from my suppliers for next year and most have increased by 20%. That money was taken from people savings without them knowing. So it is still a tax.
@Freedomnotforced Meaning that inflation is in effect a tax? Yeah, that sounds right. I am confused as to how that is 45% being taken by the government though. Like when Bush was printing dollars to pay for the wars, rather than putting it on the budget. And then when Obama but the cost on the deficit, and Fox news and the Republicans started screaming about the size of the deficit.
@ Bush, I am not Republican! I am libertarian, pro freedom, minimum government. That doesn't mean I support Bush creating inflation but not Obama. I disapprove of them both doing it because it is the same. Inflation is a tax. If you have $100k in the bank and inflation is 20% then your $100k is worth $80k next year in purchasing power. So yes it is a tax! 45% is local, state, federal, corporation tax, property tax, income tax, medicare, social security, sales tax, tariffs, inheritance,inflation
America was founded on being a tax free nation. The only reason the tax rate went so high was because of the war. 1914-18. So people are happy to pay high taxes for that. It was always intended to go back down after the war ended. But politicians never want to let a good crisis go to waste and saw it as an opportunity to make income tax permanent and grow the government. Also public radio is not a fair way to run campaigns. They are biased to the left because that is how they get paid
@Freedomnotforced We started using the income tax in 1862, and it became a permanent thing in 1913. Taxes were cut in the early 20's by Harding, because he was advised that lower taxes would spur economic growth, and result in higher revenues (I think I have heard that line before). Of course we never had higher revenues, but we did have greater economic growth, for about six years, until the depression, which came about because of little regulation and low taxes.
@aaronshoup All of your complaints about things that have actually happened have been about government interference in the market. All your criticisms of the free market are 'what ifs'. You haven't given any example of how the free market has been corrupt it has all been government! You are not arguing on principle or fact! It is just opinions and ideas of fairness. Which you want more fairness for you than for others. Keep poor people down so they can't compete. Very noble!
@aaronshoup If you understand economics then it should be obvious that economies grow with supply and not demand despite what Obama says. If we have no products or services then there is nothing to trade! We can just pass paper around but that does not help. We have to build houses, grow food, make clothes etc then we have something to trade with each other. Demand is created only when the services are there. There was no demand for computers 50 years ago, it was all created after production!
@aaronshoup If there are Billions of people willing to work for a low wage around the world and a small portion in the USA who want to set a high wage that is not related to market demand then don't be surprised when all the jobs go out of USA. The income ladder used to go from the floor to infinity. Now the bottom has been chopped off and the low skilled people can't jump high enough to get on it. If we get on it then we can climb as our skills grow with on the job training.
@Freedomnotforced Wages used to start at the floor, and then stay there. The middle class was created in this country by unions, not because of capitalism. Of course business can find some poor country to exploit for their cheap labor, just as they have exploited them for their natural resources. Do you really think that it is desirable for us to turn back into one of these poor countries? Will that really lead to equality?
@aaronshoup The option for on the jobs skills training is being eliminated at a rapid rate with all the employee demands. The business world is too competitive now to set rates that don't relate to supply and demand. It is the poorest who are harmed by the rules and regulations, and there are only so many wealthy people who will continue to pay for everyone else until they stop working or leave and when that happens all the capital will leave the country and go to where it is appreciated.
@aaronshoup The free market system was the best for those who were not born into wealth. America was not all sunshine and roses when the first people arrived. Almost all of them had to go through tough working conditions at a low wage until they built their skills and saved enough capital to set up their own businesses. Prosperity cannot be forced, it comes from a long systematic process of production. Keeping people out of the labour force does not help anyone! Even though it sounds good!
I dislike Hannity as much as the next guy, however Michael Moore is one of the largest Hypocrites in America. He is a liar and/or a fool if he believes that his wealth is not in at least some part a result of Capitalism.
The Foundation of Capitalism is Liberty and Freedom, not the corporatist crony capitalism we have now.
RON PAUL 2012, - abolish the Fed, & deregulate, it's the only way forward
The release this week of yet another survey indicating the more you watch Fox News the less they know, has once again shone a spotlight on one of the unique features that defines Rupert Murdoch's cable news outlet - it is very, very good at misinforming people. And it's very bad at reporting the news. In other words: Propaganda? Yes. News? Not so much
What's stunning is how many different areas of the news and public policy Fox viewers are misinformed
News now needs to be covered by the citizens. . We can't trust news especially Hannity/Fox . Check out Oakland P.D. arresting and drawing a taser on the crowd on Thanksgiving at freeingthemedia. The officer draws his gun at 0:01, middle left of the screen. The police used excessive force. There is also footage of Occupy Oakland shutting the ports down in Oakland. Our power is our voices and the cameras are our weapon. Mainstream media is controlled by the few. Free the media.
Supply and demand does create the wage rate. The supply of labour in the world is huge, Billions of people will work for very little and that is why jobs go overseas to the areas where they can negotiate and offer to work for
Total amnesty to the aliens throw fucking jan brewer out of the fucking country. Hannity for president of the moon
acchokiefan 10 minutes ago
I would dearly love to beat the ever living shit out of hannity and imma republican. What a pussy
acchokiefan 11 minutes ago
Capitalism...What made America great.
Legohz 55 minutes ago
fox news is so much better then cnn or msnbc
chernetgirma 19 hours ago
This Hannity guy is stupid. Really stupid, he got nothing on him. You americans are really stupid for thinking that socialism has something to do with comunism. its stupid to even think that and this hannity is really stupid. fox broadcasters are stupid
FrankForReal89 4 days ago
@FrankForReal89 you're stupid. you're really stupid. in the dictionary there is a picture of you right next to the word stupid. stupid.
vesh666 3 days ago
Michael Moore and Hannity are very similar, they both use slightly adapted facts combined with sophisms to make political points.
TheDampkap 5 days ago
Moore the useless turd doesn't even know what capitalism really is. He is so stupid that he doesn't know the difference between capitalism and corporatism. Capitalism is honest business and being successful from serving his customers like Moore does (selling retarded documentaries) Corporatism is when Obama steals all of our cash and gives it to the banks, GM and Solyndra for his own political agenda then claims to only want to help the poor. Ron Paul 2012 for real capitalism and liberty!!!
Freedomnotforced 5 days ago
Hannity acts all tough and mean but I bet if I stood in front of him and waved my cock around he would beg me to jam it up his ass hole.
IFknHateUTube 6 days ago
@IFknHateUTube probably not.
1234REEB1234 3 days ago
@IFknHateUTube "asshole". one word, tough guy.
vesh666 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey i'm watching the most racist network on earth. Fox news nazi republican propaganda. Hey rupert murdoch is trying to pass sopa bill because he does not want youtube videos that contradict his bias news network fox news. People they hate youtube videos like: fox attacks black america or fox attacks obama. Hey fox news are racist and only support republicans. They are nazi republican republican propaganda. boo. Fuck rupert murdoch and his empire of media. He wants net neutrality fuck him.
TheFreedomwriter1234 1 week ago
wow is he a chubby chunker. Dude, seriously, lose some weight
FunkyMothaFunksta 1 week ago
You know.. Hannity actually destroyed Moore I am surprised.
GracieJujitsu1 1 week ago
Why are you so hang up on the fact that Moore is rich? Don't thing about him as being rich, listen to the things he is asking... I do not support him 100% in everything but He dose make some good points. Read up on Karl Marx and his theory of communism and then say something. It is not smart to talk trash about something if you don't truly understand or don't know. Saying shit about something dose not make you smart it makes you look close-minded and dumb.
TheAlkoholichar 1 week ago
Comment removed
sexdanskater 1 week ago
Moore is a fuckin fool he stands for occupy wall street but has a mil.dollar vacation home pfft fuckin faggot hes a fuckin snake and idiots who watch his movies are getting him rich he wants to distribute wealth well hit me up fuckin stupid walrus
B4LTHOR 1 week ago
@B4LTHOR It's better then him staying rich and saying nothing about how the lower classes are treated? Ungrateful ass hole.
TheSaintAza 1 week ago
what i hate is that i don't think that bush or cheney or hannity are conservative, they aren't fiscal conservative, they have a twisted moral conservatism, anti gay rights,. These neo cons are revolutionary in their twisted philosophy
toberses11 2 weeks ago
fox is the cancer of america
Miyabiii 2 weeks ago
Moore is ridiculous. He cant even admit that he's is rich off his own work that he takes pride in.
Phildakoolkat 2 weeks ago
Whenever I see Hannity, I think that a box is missing its Tool.
pbodytakesmewayback 2 weeks ago
Moore made his money because he created SOMETHING VALUABLE .
The wall street fuckers made billions without adding any value to the market place .
NexisFilms 2 weeks ago 3
Very interesting. I had no idea Michael Moore believed so much in Jesus.
Krusen72 3 weeks ago
Jewish money do both of them get I wan to know jewish money is dirty money.
quantumofhate 3 weeks ago
Fuck Fox !.. Fuck hannity ..
NexisFilms 3 weeks ago
In my defense the condemnation of religion is not to say many ideas are not worthwhile but to say the practice of religion (organized) has fallen short and we need to apply perhaps many ideals and move past superstition.
frost1947 3 weeks ago
I understand the reference however he also claims his own affinity for the ideology in discussion. We are far from tribal and our justice system relies and revolves, evolves, in a secular application
frost1947 3 weeks ago
It is laughable how Hannity trashes Moore for making money, but He is rich himself. What a hipocrate!
TerryComo2010 3 weeks ago 7
@TerryComo2010
Hannity isn't the one trashing the system that allowed him to earn that money, Moore is, that is the difference. I don't like Sean Hannity, but I think he has a point on this one.
HDaviator 3 weeks ago
@TerryComo2010 ya he is rich, but he has nothing against himself been rich, moore says everyone should be equal yet he is very rich, moore is the hipocrate in that respect.
messi996 1 week ago
@TerryComo2010 That's what you liberals don't understand, you don't see the point, Hannity isn't trashing the system OR trashing Moore about making money, yes they are both rich, but Moore is bitching about the same system that made him successful, it just seems kind of counter intuitive and out of place, Hannity isn't complaining about our system at all. Hannity is complaining about how Moore complains about our system. I don't expect you to understand this though, it can be a confusing topic.
xXxDANMANxXx 1 week ago
@xXxDANMANxXx You Republicans are the dumbest shits of all time. You voted in the most stupid, moronic, evil and scumbag of a president (GW Bush) this country ever had. You are now trying to give us Perry, (stupider than Palin), Ron Paul (a certified idoit and alzheimers patient) and Romney (an overblown scumbag 1% carpetbagger, vulture capitalist). You and your ilk have brought this country to it's knees. Hope your enjoy it because it's an Obama landslide coming this November!
TerryComo2010 1 week ago
@TerryComo2010 Because Obama is so much better than Bush huh? This country is a welfare state thanks to that clown racking in more debt than all presidents combined. I could shit out a better economy than you're best friend Osama, oh my bad, OBAMA.... You're the most narrow minded left wing cock I've ever witnessed. I don't want Perry, I want Ron Paul. If Obama gets re-elected, America WILL fail, we're on the brink of bankruptcy because of him. Fuck your welfare mentality bitch
xXxDANMANxXx 1 week ago
@xXxDANMANxXx This is my last retort, (yes I will let you look it up in the dictionary), to your stupidity. The mess we are in is because of Bush, not Obama. The deficit is from two wars, one illegal, and neither paid for! IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead of paying for the wars, he gave the 1% tax cuts! Bush was, is and will be put down in history as the dumbest shit of a President this country ever had. Enjoy November!
TerryComo2010 1 week ago
@TerryComo2010 is this what they teach in middle schools now? Ever heard of the credit crisis? Obama Care? The fucking bail outs? Bullshit green energy that obama spends our money on? And you think the economy is fucked from Bush? HAHAH YOU'RE SUCH A FUCKING RETARD. That was 4 years ago bitch, bush tax cuts were for everyone, not just the top %1, find something better to bitch about then the "evil" top %1 because that's all you jealous whining liberals do. Get a life and educate yourself dumbass
xXxDANMANxXx 1 week ago
@xXxDANMANxXx The economy has been fucked since Nixon took the currency off the Gold standard in 71. Then all politicians with the help of the FEDeral reserve have been creating bubbles in the economy by messing about with the interest rates and printing lots of cheap money. Freddie and Fannie/ government backed bank accounts and mortgages have all trashed the economy. Republicans and democrats are exactly the same. We need Ron Paul to end the corruption and restore capitalism. Honest business!
Freedomnotforced 5 days ago
@xXxDANMANxXx The economy was really fucked when Bush took over, then Obama got a worse economy and he has trashed it more than anyone in American History. There is no two party system. There is only one party all wanting bigger government, higher taxes, more wars and more control of our lives. We need real capitalism back where real success is created by serving customers not stealing from the tax payers. Ron Paul will end the IRS and income taxes and stop the bailouts and green energy shit!
Freedomnotforced 5 days ago
@TerryComo2010 it must be so easy to be a juvenile from left field, if there's a problem, you blame it on the right. It's never your party (which, in fact it always is) but it's always the right. 30 years from now when the economy is all fine and dandy because obama won't get reelected and we'll get someone in office with a brain and knows how our system works, you'll still be that one guy saying how bad it is because you're too lazy to get a job. Start making your "end is near" posters now haha
xXxDANMANxXx 1 week ago
@TerryComo2010 He's pointing out the hypocrisy of Moore's position, one that he doesn't share. People watching this video must be complete retards to vote up a comment that spells hypocrite with an 'A'
scamwa 1 week ago
@TerryComo2010 He wasn't trashing him for making money he was trashing him for making huge amounts of money from capitalism. Then he goes and makes a movie about how terrible capitalism and how disgraceful it is that people are making huge amounts of money while the average american is poor. That is being an ultimate hypocrite!! On Piers Morgan show Moore denied that he was a millionaire. He has made over $50m from his movies and won't even admit it, so he can be an occupier at wall street.
Freedomnotforced 5 days ago
@TerryComo2010 lol hippo-crate
parkerthehicks 4 days ago
@TerryComo2010 He's not a hypocrite for saying that. Hannity believes that you should be able to make as much money as you can. He's claiming that Moore is a hypocrite for making money off of movies that promote the opposite.
1234REEB1234 3 days ago
@TerryComo2010 and that makes you an idiot.
vesh666 3 days ago
I wasn't aware Micheal Moore was delusional "you will be judged" Jesus????What's up with the religion nonsense?
frost1947 3 weeks ago
@frost1947 the point he's trying to make, as i understand it, is that many politicians praise themselves for being devoted christians, but when it comes to actually following the word of christ - you know all that socialist talk of feeding the hungry and selling your possessions and giving it to the poor :) - they don't do it and instead give tax cuts to the rich and cut services for the poor.
N0madist 3 weeks ago
@frost1947 A lot of democrats/liberals are religious, despite what the right wing media leads you to believe. Atheists and agnostics are VERY rare. Jesus was actually very liberal if you read much of the new testament. But I agree with you.... I'm agnostic myself. Until we can prove any religion is true I won't believe in any of it. Until then, I guess I'll just have to be happy with going to hell (because every religious person thinks I will).
jcdntn55 2 weeks ago
9:09
"If you cant explain it simply then you dont understand it fully."-Albert Einstein
We3SmokeTree 4 weeks ago
Good tit for tat video, Sean Hannity and Michael Moore are a good match. I'd say the outcome is equal, but it's nice to see liberals and conservatives in friendly debate.
imlivinitupniggaz 4 weeks ago
7:20 Michael SCHOOLS him.
duurg 1 month ago
Michael Moore: The belly core of hypocricy. Go die, you fat fuck!
NewDay923 1 month ago
Moore looks good again. Good monkey bar analogy.
liam13coins 1 month ago 2
People are Conservative until it happens to them.
StraightFashionMan 1 month ago 24
@StraightFashionMan best words i read for a long time
trycoun 2 weeks ago
@StraightFashionMan people are liberal until there asses flush out into the government toilet
MrDanSmithJr 2 weeks ago
@StraightFashionMan people are liberals until they see it from a different perspective, that or just wake up and smell the bullshit
xXxDANMANxXx 1 week ago
@StraightFashionMan People are liberal until their first paycheck goes to people too incompetent to support themselves. As Churchill said, a conservative before the age of 30 doesn't have a heart, a liberal after the age of 30 doesn't have a brain.
GracieJujitsu1 1 week ago
All I got to say to america is, don't start shit, won't be shit!
Ravenite1 1 month ago
The fact that Moore is a millionaire means nothing. He believes than taxes should be RAISED on the wealthiest Americans, while Sean Hannity and his greedy, corporate pig buddies don't. If you think raising taxes on corporations by 2% is communism, then you are an IDIOT. Middle and Lower class Americans pay about 33-35% income taxes. Corporations and the rich, after all the loopholes, pay as little as 1% (even though they're officially supposed to pay about 30%).
jcdntn55 1 month ago
@jcdntn55 Yes, and a flat tax with no loop holes would take care of this. I still believe in the capital system, but bailing out the bankers was B.S. While they vacationed on the beach in San Diego my family lost their livelihood, my job, our home, my retirement, my health insurance, my life insurance, and now my health is failing. 1/3 of my income took care of my mortgage and monthly living expenses. I was responsible. Now I have a McJob. Down with Barack and Michelle 'let them eat cake' Obama.
Kintercept 1 month ago
@jcdntn55 Well said. The top 5% of Americans make 95% of the money. The bottom 95% fight over the remaining 5%. Is this right? I have a full time 40 hour a week job and I had to move back in with my parents to support the cost of living. I am a college graduate, teaching children, and I live with my parents. Explain that.
duurg 1 month ago
@duurg You say it so simply. Why the hell cannot the people that vote republican see that. Thanks
TerryComo2010 3 weeks ago
@duurg amen. You're not the only one that had to move back in with their parents. I did, and so did millions of other americans thanks to far-right republican policies and the failure of democrats to stop them. I fear the only way out now is to do what the founding fathers did..... if you get what I mean.
jcdntn55 2 weeks ago
Moore is such a fucking big mouth communist ... the quicker he chokes on a twinkie or a dick the better off the country will be ...
zR750gUY 1 month ago
@zR750gUY Hey guys, Sean Hannity's YouTube account: zR750gUY
Sappyspartan 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CHECK THIS VIDEO OUT!!! YOU WILL BE PISSED!! TYPE IN:
Father Nathan Monk at Pensacola City Council
TELL AMERICA WHAT YOU THINK!!!
brettheatley11 1 month ago
Just love how Mr. Moore waves through the millions killed by Pol Pot and Stalin like water down a ducks back as if it were nothing.
Ben1238 1 month ago
Hannity takes the 911 Commission as the "word". He questions nothing? Smug be thy name.
Real intelligence can listen to both side without anger. As a long time Republican, guys like Hannity disgust me. Discussion and understanding is the way to freedom.
witzerdog 1 month ago
@witzerdog LOL, you contradict yourself in saying that "long time Republican guys" have nothing to bring to the table. Does not sound like you really care to understand their opinion. What type of freedom are you talking about? The freedom to think the same way you do?
Kintercept 1 month ago
@Kintercept I'm saying I am a long time Republican. I think guys like Hannity and O'Reilly give the party a bad name by being polarizing, inflammatory and unwilling to reason/change/ or listen if someone labels themselves a Democrat.
witzerdog 4 weeks ago
lol just checked Moore's net worth online............50 Million
why was he fumbling over his words when he was asked if he was a multi-millionaire again?
freezerburns12 1 month ago
@freezerburns12 He looks down when asked about his wealth and seems ashamed. Inside every liberal is a capitalist dieing to get out, just look at 9-holes Obama these days.
Kintercept 1 month ago
@Kintercept Can you blame Americans for the American dream? Everyone hopes to one day achieve success... To provide for ones children. Looking down seems more humble than covering a secret.
duurg 1 month ago
michael moore vs. bill o'reilly is much better
blueshade26 1 month ago
dear god Michael Moore sounds really stupid
TheLinkWithTheRants 1 month ago
i expected a black hole to take form when they shook hands
TheLinkWithTheRants 1 month ago
How come all the medias political commentary guys are Irish? Hannity , Moore, O'Rielly ?
UncaDollas 1 month ago
@UncaDollas so THATS why they suck....Thanks man I learn something new everyday
ninmachine109 1 month ago
America could cut "defence" spending by multi-billions and it would still have the best military in the world by far ! Wake up America - your military industrial complex's grip on everything is not a good thing !
Claronium780 1 month ago
Sean Hanity is so defensive and unhappy. He talks so fast which means a disturbed soul.
SuperKingsincere 1 month ago
@SuperKingsincere Thats a dumb assesment....
InKellyWeTrust 1 month ago
Two scum bags bickering for 12 minutes... thanks?
slumberingsam 1 month ago
Hannity - Neocon blowhard
Michael Moore - Far left douche
Encom7 1 month ago
When I talk about principles I mean that providing service is the fairest way to get rich as long as it is voluntary at all levels then no 3rd party should have any say if they are not being harmed against their will.I think stealing is wrong, no matter who the goods go to!Even if 51% vote that it ok.Gang rape is no better than ordinary rape even if it is democratic! I love charity because if I don't agree with what they do I take my money away.Most people in a free society would help each other
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced The reason why democracy is the fairest system, is because society is an illusion. In nature, everything is owned, and shared, by every other person in the world. We create a society under the assumption that it will be better for everyone involved, and if it is not, the society is unjust. Those are the principles that are behind democracy. I think we have seen, that people will not donate enough to charity, and churches simply cannot handle it.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup So the government passing a law requiring black people to sit at the back of the bus and give up their seat to a white person is a good way around racism? Most racism was backed by laws and it wasn't until those laws were revoked that racism started to disappear. Personally I would rather let a racist be racist and then I would know which people I did not want to do business with. Most business people are too greedy to be racist as it hurts business, not help it.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Jim Crow laws were passed because people wanted them. I agree that "Plessy", was decided incorrectly, but it is not as though the government created racism. Racism has a long and ugly history in this country. Business owners today, primarily in the south, are still racist, and use symbolism to keep minorities out of their businesses. The people there think it is just fine.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup No one believes in democracy as an absolute, if 51% vote to shoot the other 49% that does not make it right. The same as when 51% vote to steal from 10% that does not make it right. A simple majority is fine for some simple matters but not determining individual liberties. BTW America was built on the idea of being a republic not a democracy. The founders did not like democracy because they know that the powers are abused by the majority and the minority has rights too.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Of course we do not live in a "direct democracy", however we also do not have a classical "republic" either. Our representatives are democratically elected, and we have protections for the minority.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup before government intervention america had the greatest level of charity ever seen in the world. Health care was more affordable and poor people did not get turned away. There is no system that benefits the poor and eliminates poverty better than the free market. Communist China had a living standard 20-1 worse than americans when it was communist and america was free. Now that america is more socialist and china is more capitalist it is almost 5-1.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Actually, at the founding of the country, when George Washington was president, we had a crisis, and it was clear that the churches were not capable of providing for the poor. At that time the U.S. started making welfare payments to people, and we have never looked back. I honestly think however, that the best welare program is a good job. That is really what we need to be focused on. China!? Examples of totalitarian regimes? Yeah they live a lot worse.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The minimum wage when it was introduced in South Africa was mostly supported by white labour unions who would never have a black person in their union. Black workers would offer to work for 1/4 of what unions demanded and so they took the jobs from the whites. Then the unions made it law for companies to pay higher wages to eliminate the competition. Low skilled workers lost their only weapon which was to offer to work for less. Minimum wage is the most racist law in the country!
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced The right to work for less. Hell, we are basically there now. When I lived in Florida I worked for 6$/hr, in 2010. It is going to be difficult to make me believe that working for less is really desireable. Corporations are posting record profits, they are hoarding money, sometimes paying no taxes. The truth of course, is that the only power that low skilled workers have is in numbers, like in a union.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
In a free market we are paid in direct proportion to how replaceable we are. If no one else can do our job then we can push up the wages just to the point at which a company still makes a profit on our skills. Every person is either selling products or services and they need to bid against the other people offering the same products or services.Whoever offers the best quality at the lowest price gets the contract.That is the fairest way to doit otherwise how would we decide who getsthe contract?
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I remember Rand Paul, arguing that no business owner would be racist, because it would hurt his business. And yet, there are business owners that are racist. Of course people could choose to do business with someone else, but the amount of transparency that would be required, simply makes that impossible.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced That is largely true, however if the average worker makes 3$/hr than a person with desireable skills will make 10$. If the average makes 30$/hr, than they will make 100$. I agree with you, however, what about the guy with an 85 iq? Should he just die? Or work for 1$/hr? Your system is great for people that are born into great wealth, but not everyone can be rich. It is the nature of the system. Again, this is fine, but how far down is the bottom?
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup If you create your own world you can work in ideal situation, but this world we need to work in realities. You need to decide if you would rather have 100% of the people having opportunities to work at low wages or you can have 20% of people working at artificially high wages and the other 80% out of work.When I was homeless I would rather have had a low paying job that was easy to get into than no job at all.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced There seem to be some unfounded assumptions underlying your arguments. #1 the rich/corporations are not making lots of money. #2 wages are higher, and #3 that productivity is down. All three of these are demonstrably untrue. Productivity has gone up tremendously, particularly during the recession, corporations are making record profits, and wages are them same as they were in 1980.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup 80% of millionaires in the USA are first generation wealth. In centrally planned economies almost all of the rich were 3rd, 4th, 5th generation wealth. Free markets have a massive amount of economic mobility between income classes. 80% of people who were in the bottom 20% of income in 1970 are now in the top 50%. This is not because of unions, but despite the harm unions do. Ford was the first person in history to pay employees $5 per day and that was without unions.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced We reached peak wages in '67, and we had 35% union membership. Today we have 9% and wages are half of what they were then. I think that you set up a "straw man" when you argue against "centrally planned economies", and pretend as though that is the system that I am in favor of.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup Unions are the most racist group there have ever been. They hate competition from minorities so they passed a wage law that priced them out of the market. They are for equality as long as it is their group who are the most equal. They sold the minimum wage law to the public as something that would help the low skilled minorities because the evil businessmen were exploiting them by hiring them for low wages, but really they just wanted to keep their own jobs safe.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I see no problem with trying to protect your own job.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The economy is either run by the people or run by the state. You may say that a mixture is best, but that is only best for special interest groups like wall street, politicians and union members. We either have politicians messing up the market giving special favours or we don't. A mix is probably the worst. At least with a centrally planned economy everyone (except government workers) knows they are going to be screwed. In a mix economy it is a lottery who gets helped or screwed
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced The economy ran great for a long time. We had no bubbles, just long, gradual growth. What, besides everyone buying into your ideology, do you think would prevent the rich from using their wealth to get special favors from the government? We have been talking about this for weeks, and you seem to think that if we all just say "no", then the rich will not use their money to influence government. I don't get it.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
I am not pro rich. I am pro freedom. I want to stop government from handing out favours to the rich and anyone else. When we take away the power of government to hand out favours then there is no one to influence. You keep talking like I want the rich to buy the government by taking the power of government away. You want to give the government more power to make laws and then the rich have more of an incentive to influence it. If they can make laws in the market they cant sell favours!
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I still can't understand. What is going to stop the rich from influencing government in your vision?
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup I'm on your side, but your not!
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The government did not mess with the market significantly until 1913. Up to that time there were only minor expansions and contractions like every industry will go through. It is natural. But when the government interfered then the downturns got longer and more severe. The federal reserve was set up to stop banks failing when there was a run. They let over 600 banks fail before they stepped in to help out. This is what caused the great depression.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Actually the U.S. economy went through 6 month boom and bust cycles all through the 19th century. Major bank failures were common, this, and keeping unemployment low, is why the federal reserve was set up. I am not in favor of the fed, and I think it should be nationalized. But the economy crashed in the 20's because taxes were reduced on the rich, and after about 6 or 7 years, they have bought everything that they are going to buy.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup 1921, 22, 23 tax cuts, and more importantly they created a capital gains tax. 1929 we had the crash. 1981 and a crash in 87. 2001 and a crash in 08. It is just how it works. When it is more beneficial for people to take wealth out of their businesses, they do. The rich do not make good consumers, because they only by so many mansions, and then they stop consuming.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup Then the new deal policies prolonged the depression. They took the capital away from the people who would buy assets and set up new businesses that would have turned the economy around. They stole the money from the producers and gave it to people who consumed it. When you do this of course the economy cannot recover. Giving people useless jobs helps temporarily but depletes much needed resources to boost industry. The great depression would have been a minor recession if left alone
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Investment happens second. First, you need demand, then comes investment. When there is no demand, the rich will not invest, because there is no reason to believe that you will get your investment back. Right now there is weak demand, and banks are taking money from the fed, and investing in T-bills. That way they earn 2% on their money, pay .01% in interest back to the fed, and pocket the difference.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
So far we know you don't like free market (which created the greatest increase in standard of life for the average person in history 1776-1913) you don't like centrally planned economies and you don't like the current system which is a mix (government taking 45% of income and spending it) What else is there? What system do you want? You haven't yet said anything about the system you want, so maybe you could tell me which you think is the best?
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Actually that is not true. We have never seen free-markets, and we never will. Our economy has never been a "free-market" economy. There are always rules in any social encounter, and there is always a power structure.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup You seem to promote the same idea that 'those people' from other countries shouldn't be allowed to take american jobs because we deserve them just because we were born in a better country. Lets make a law to stop foreign workers competing because they are being offered jobs at low wages and we can't compete - "I mean they are being exploited" (wink wink) Lets help the poor by keeping manufacturing jobs away from them and send them back to begging, clearing trash, starving and misery.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I never said any of that. We should protect American jobs, because that is best for us. It is also not beneficial to people in other countries to have their domestic industries destroyed, just so they can receive a sub-substance level job. We have seen this all over the world.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup That is what the unions said too. We should protect our jobs because that is best for us. So lets not give the other people a chance. We can block them out with guns because they are being exploited. But I guess you are right, you wouldn't want to ruin all the high paying begging and trash clearing jobs. That would be horrendous!
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced What do you think our military uses when they go into small countries and force them to do what we want, on behalf of the rich? Help small countries build economies that make them more self reliant, not economies that cause people to be dependent on sub-subsistence level jobs.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced NAFTA completely destroyed Haiti's domestic rice industry. Europe, and the U.S. have forced (through domestic policy) South American countries into an economy (which is the same as their colonial history) where they export natural resources, and import goods. This type of system is exploitation. Have you ever seen video of the places where Walmart workers live in China? They keep them in dark dorms, and charge them whether they use them or not.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
I don't know much about nafta, but free trade means everyone has a chance to compete.Equal opportunities for all. Not equality of results but equality of competition. Every form of protectionism helps one groups but artificially harms another. It is always easier to see who is being helped directly but not so easy to see the millions who are being harmed by being blocked out of the market place. In a free market wal mart could not force anything on anyone unless they agree to the terms
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I love arguing with libertarians. Largely because I know that you are sincere. However, I think that libertarians live in a world of ideas, and never really deal with reality. Every country has a different situation. Different living costs, different industries, different values. Putting a highly subsidized industry, up against small farmers, in a third world country does no one any good. Not good for farmers, taxpayers, governments, no one. Just the rich
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup You are so far off on so many points I actually feel embarrassed for you! Nationalise the FED? lol I didn't know it was a private business? lol :) Crash happened because the taxes were reduced? Income tax (16th amendment) was introduced in 1913 before that Government spending never went over 10% of GNP. Less to spend less harm they can do! 6 month boom and bust is not a problem. 10 year depressions caused and prolonged by government is a problem.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Actually none of what you just said is true. The Federal Reserve Bank is a group of privately owned banks. The board is mainly made up of presidential appointments. However, the FED is private. The top marginal income tax in 1921 was 73%, and was reduced to 25%, in increments, from 1922 until 1925.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
The rich had bought everything they were going to buy? What are you smoking? What stops government being influenced? The fact that they don't take 45% of the nations income and decide who to give it to. Do you think there would be 1000's of lobbyists if there was not a big pot to be handed out and if we did not let politicians hand out favours. If the pot was not there then there is nothing to influence.If the government can't mess with the market why would you want to influence them?
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced The government does not take 45% of the nations income. The government takes about 26% of GDP, which is about 1/2 of what Europe does. However, the percentage seems superfluous. As long as there are rule makers, how do you stop big business from trying to influence them. Without making influencing them illegal, and take away the incentive.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup What system do you think is best? How do you plan to stop people influencing politicians?
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I want private industry to handle as much as possible. Public services need to be handled by the government, regardless of inefficiencies, to ensure that they are fairly administered.
Going to publicly funded campaigns, and making all political contributions illegal would get rid of most of the corruption. We already have the infrastructure, pbs, npr, etc., could air debates. They could talk about issues, rather than mudslinging, because the funding would not be there.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I want private industry to handle as much as possible. Public services need to be handled by the government, regardless of inefficiencies, to ensure that they are fairly administered.
Going to publicly funded campaigns, and making all political contributions illegal would get rid of most of the corruption. We already have the infrastructure, pbs, npr, etc., could air debates. They could talk about issues, rather than mudslinging, because the funding would not be there.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup You are basically saying that - if we stop the thief from stealing how are we going to stop people buying the goods he steals? By him not having goods there is nothing to buy!!!!!!! Let's let him steal more because that will stop people buying the stolen goods because we can get a thief who just wants to give the goods to us! And he can block minorities and poor people out of the market to keep our jobs. Still you have not made a valid complaint about the free market?
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I disagree that the government taxing people, to pay for the society that they live in is stealing.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup Of course taxing people to live in the society is not stealing. We need to pay for defence, police, courts, street services and some admin costs. That is completely fair and no one would disagree with paying for that. What is stealing is when money is taken from one person by force and given to another. Spreading the wealth around as Obama says is theft. Taking from people who use it to produce and giving it to people for consumption is destructive to a society.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Making sure that everyone eats, is stealing? I don't get that.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The thing I like most about libertarians is that they have a moral code that is consistent. Whatever moral code you run is insane. It does not have any logic. You criticise racism then want to keep poor people of a different race out of the work force by law to keep your job. You think that stealing is ok if it has a noble purpose. If I break into your house and steal your belongings is it no longer theft if I give it to a poor person?
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced A moral code that is consistent, is not necessarily good, just because it is consistent. You seem to confuse morality, and politics. Morality is how you deal with people on an individual basis, politics are the rules by which we run a society. I think that if you got what you wanted, you wouldn't want it any more. The most important thing is that everyone eats, not that some are billionaires.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
I'm not going to defend Fox as to be honest I have only really seen Stossell and O'Reilly. Stossell is a libertarian so I love his programme and he is pro freedom and consistent with his views, and believes that america should stick to the principles of the founders and the constitution. But saying CNN presents news without opinion is a joke. I heard much more about Occupy than I did the Tea Party. I guess the libertarians show the stupidity of Occupy and Socialist do the same with the tea party
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@aaronshoup A moral code that is not consistent is not a moral code. It is just based on whims and whatever we think is best at the time, that is dangerous. Like it is ok to be a racist or a thief when it benefits us. If you study British History you will see that clearly when the taxes are reduced GDP increases and so does tax revenue.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced That is correct, about a moral code. My moral code is consistent. However, clearly our political philosophy cannot be the same as our moral code. For instance, the military kills people, with legitimacy, because they are under civilian rule. They are legitimate, because of the flag on their shoulders. Reduced income taxes, in this country, have never produced more tax revenue. Alan Greenspan is an objectivist.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup How do you distinguish between public and private funding? The public is made up of private individuals. We actually agree on most things. But, not spread the wealth mentality, the idea of what public services should be and foreign trade policies. I am more of a global person and believe all men were created equal and deserve a fair chance no matter where they were born.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced The difference between public and private funding, is that all candidates, regardless of party, as long as they have a set percentage of votes, would receive the same amount of money to campaign with. Private funding would be illegal. I don't think that it is fair that one person has more political power, because they have more money, than another.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I disagree that public radio and tv are liberal. They are both funded by private corporations, as are all of the media outlets. The mainstream media is very conservative, and of course Fox is almost fascist in their outlook. There are some news shows that are liberal, but all you have to do is look at the way that the media treated the "occupy" movement, to see the conservative bias. Nobody knew why they were there? What they were doing?
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup Way off on the Fox comment. If you watched people like John Stossell he speaks truth and lets everyone have their say. His moral code is consistent throughout. CNN etc is just about fairness, which is all subjective and impossible to live by because you never know what everyone thinks is fair. Fox presenters more than anyone follow the constitution and the true values of America (except O Reilly, I can't stand him. He is a racist war monger)
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced No, Fox news confuses the news, by weaving opinion, and news, to create a mess. CNN is about presenting the news, without opinion. All of the news agencies, however, is owned by multi-national corporations. If you think that they are liberal, I think you are crazy. Studies show that Fox news viewers are the most uninformed of all other media viewers.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The same bias that happens with occupy is happening with the Tea party. They all find the most lunatic people at each rally and say that they speak for the whole lot. But that gets ratings. With mobs you will always get genuine people out to get a solution and nutters because they are just angry and have nothing better to do than cause trouble.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I agree with part of that. However, the tea party had 500 people, and every news outlet was present. The occupy people had 20,000 and I would ask friends/family what they thought, and they hadn't even heard about the protests.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
The income tax in 1862 was just for the war, not in peace time. All rules change for war. We never had a great depression anytime until the taxes were raised. The idea that tax cuts caused the depression is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Lower taxes does increase revenue. You can study all countries through history and that is the case. High taxes destroys incentives to produce. Creating penalties for production and paying people not to work destroys countries economic growth.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Alan Greenspan testified in front of congress during the summer of 2010. He was asked whether lower taxes have resulted in higher revenues, and after some evasive answers, he finally answered, "no they do not". There has never been a time, with the exception of capital gains taxes, when lower rates have ever yielded higher revenues. The economy was very good when taxes were high. We have had recessions since the beginning of time.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
When the state runs the economy and redistributes the wealth do you think it stops people from starving? Starvation in America is probably about 100 per year at most. USSR, Eastern Europe, North Korea, China had millions and millions of people starve to death in the 20th century, so again the facts are against you. Free markets prevent poverty and increase all levels of income better than any system in history. When people are not having their wealth stolen then give much more to charity.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Wow, is that our bench mark? Starvation? My goodness. The reason why people don't starve to death in this country, is because of our social safety net. However, there was starvation during the Great Depression, and there was significant starvation during the 19th century.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup Just wanted to say that I had never really watched any shows on Fox except Stossel and Judge Napolianto. They are great shows. You talked about Fox viewers being the most misinformed. After watching some of their programmes during the presidential campaign, I think you understated how misinformed their viewers are. Fox is the worst news station in the world, closely followed by CNN. Pack of absolute retards with the most bias and corrupt coverage ever imagined. Absolute knobheads
Freedomnotforced 5 days ago
@aaronshoup America had the closest thing to a free market that has ever been seen in a country with such a large population and the lack of restriction created innovation and wealth like never seen before. Tax cuts did not create the depression and that doesn't make sense. But I concede the point about the FED. Government takes much closer to 45% than 26% when you take in all revenue sources including inflation from printing money.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I'm not sure where you are getting that figure from. That sounds awfully high.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The 45% figure came from the political debates. The official figure both sides use is 39% but the inflation figure is debatable because they won't admit the true figure. They say it is about 5-6% but when you compare the dollar price to products such as oil, silver, gold, food etc then it is really about 15-25%. I just got prices from my suppliers for next year and most have increased by 20%. That money was taken from people savings without them knowing. So it is still a tax.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Meaning that inflation is in effect a tax? Yeah, that sounds right. I am confused as to how that is 45% being taken by the government though. Like when Bush was printing dollars to pay for the wars, rather than putting it on the budget. And then when Obama but the cost on the deficit, and Fox news and the Republicans started screaming about the size of the deficit.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@ Bush, I am not Republican! I am libertarian, pro freedom, minimum government. That doesn't mean I support Bush creating inflation but not Obama. I disapprove of them both doing it because it is the same. Inflation is a tax. If you have $100k in the bank and inflation is 20% then your $100k is worth $80k next year in purchasing power. So yes it is a tax! 45% is local, state, federal, corporation tax, property tax, income tax, medicare, social security, sales tax, tariffs, inheritance,inflation
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced I know that you are a Libertarian, I was giving that as an example to your point.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
America was founded on being a tax free nation. The only reason the tax rate went so high was because of the war. 1914-18. So people are happy to pay high taxes for that. It was always intended to go back down after the war ended. But politicians never want to let a good crisis go to waste and saw it as an opportunity to make income tax permanent and grow the government. Also public radio is not a fair way to run campaigns. They are biased to the left because that is how they get paid
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced We started using the income tax in 1862, and it became a permanent thing in 1913. Taxes were cut in the early 20's by Harding, because he was advised that lower taxes would spur economic growth, and result in higher revenues (I think I have heard that line before). Of course we never had higher revenues, but we did have greater economic growth, for about six years, until the depression, which came about because of little regulation and low taxes.
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup All of your complaints about things that have actually happened have been about government interference in the market. All your criticisms of the free market are 'what ifs'. You haven't given any example of how the free market has been corrupt it has all been government! You are not arguing on principle or fact! It is just opinions and ideas of fairness. Which you want more fairness for you than for others. Keep poor people down so they can't compete. Very noble!
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@aaronshoup If you understand economics then it should be obvious that economies grow with supply and not demand despite what Obama says. If we have no products or services then there is nothing to trade! We can just pass paper around but that does not help. We have to build houses, grow food, make clothes etc then we have something to trade with each other. Demand is created only when the services are there. There was no demand for computers 50 years ago, it was all created after production!
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@aaronshoup If there are Billions of people willing to work for a low wage around the world and a small portion in the USA who want to set a high wage that is not related to market demand then don't be surprised when all the jobs go out of USA. The income ladder used to go from the floor to infinity. Now the bottom has been chopped off and the low skilled people can't jump high enough to get on it. If we get on it then we can climb as our skills grow with on the job training.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@Freedomnotforced Wages used to start at the floor, and then stay there. The middle class was created in this country by unions, not because of capitalism. Of course business can find some poor country to exploit for their cheap labor, just as they have exploited them for their natural resources. Do you really think that it is desirable for us to turn back into one of these poor countries? Will that really lead to equality?
aaronshoup 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The option for on the jobs skills training is being eliminated at a rapid rate with all the employee demands. The business world is too competitive now to set rates that don't relate to supply and demand. It is the poorest who are harmed by the rules and regulations, and there are only so many wealthy people who will continue to pay for everyone else until they stop working or leave and when that happens all the capital will leave the country and go to where it is appreciated.
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
@aaronshoup The free market system was the best for those who were not born into wealth. America was not all sunshine and roses when the first people arrived. Almost all of them had to go through tough working conditions at a low wage until they built their skills and saved enough capital to set up their own businesses. Prosperity cannot be forced, it comes from a long systematic process of production. Keeping people out of the labour force does not help anyone! Even though it sounds good!
Freedomnotforced 1 month ago
I dislike Hannity as much as the next guy, however Michael Moore is one of the largest Hypocrites in America. He is a liar and/or a fool if he believes that his wealth is not in at least some part a result of Capitalism.
The Foundation of Capitalism is Liberty and Freedom, not the corporatist crony capitalism we have now.
RON PAUL 2012, - abolish the Fed, & deregulate, it's the only way forward
accountNo9 1 month ago
Sean Hannity's Dog was attacked in a new york city dog park!! check out the video
emilygutierez 1 month ago
ad hominem fallacy, google about that, guys
marcos20alves 1 month ago
SURVEY FOX NEWS
By Eric Boehlert
The release this week of yet another survey indicating the more you watch Fox News the less they know, has once again shone a spotlight on one of the unique features that defines Rupert Murdoch's cable news outlet - it is very, very good at misinforming people. And it's very bad at reporting the news. In other words: Propaganda? Yes. News? Not so much
What's stunning is how many different areas of the news and public policy Fox viewers are misinformed
stagleap07 1 month ago
News now needs to be covered by the citizens. . We can't trust news especially Hannity/Fox . Check out Oakland P.D. arresting and drawing a taser on the crowd on Thanksgiving at freeingthemedia. The officer draws his gun at 0:01, middle left of the screen. The police used excessive force. There is also footage of Occupy Oakland shutting the ports down in Oakland. Our power is our voices and the cameras are our weapon. Mainstream media is controlled by the few. Free the media.
freeingthemedia 1 month ago
Supply and demand does create the wage rate. The supply of labour in the world is huge, Billions of people will work for very little and that is why jobs go overseas to the areas where they can negotiate and offer to work for