Capitalist vs Socialist: Equality

Why only punish people for being born rich? Why not punish people for being born beautiful?

Alternate Channel: http://www.youtube.com/otherjacobspinney

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• jacobspinney
• capitalism
• vs
• socialism
• equality
• fairness
• inheritance
• rich

[TheMasterjack89]

You don't know what your talking about, Socialism promotes the protection and well being of labourors and looks out for the lower classes so that their not trampled on by the upper classes. In Socialist nations, the governments only take control of public institutions (healthcare and education) becuse they are public serives that are not ment for profit. Socialists do allow private property (even million dollar houses) and free markets. Your video was a pathetic look at Russian Communism

[BillGoose1313]

From his website: Jacob Spinney performs seemingly impossible feats of thought reading and mind control. "Some people confuse me with a psychic. However, I prefer to call myself a Mentalist in that none of what I do, to my knowledge, involves any paranormal or supernatural abilities. I merely use my five senses to create the illusion of the sixth." IS THIS REALLY THE PERSON YOU SHOULD BE LISTENING TO FOR SOCIAL AND POLITICAL COMMENTARY? Is it me or does this guy seem really douche-ey...

[jumpnjza2]

You should be executed.

[OverlordShamala]

@Faerlon123

Actually that is not the truth, corporations and rich people may support a candidate they want. But they don't always win. One example is Obama, he pushed the US further to the left. Sure you can hate him then insult him & claim that he was put by the "corporate rich", which it's not true. Usually using the phrase "corporate rich" is just to insult people you disagree.

[TheSovietSuperpower]

Advocating the theory of Social Darwinism? What a fucking moron...

[erichargrave12]

@Faerlon123 The state paying for general elections is not an ideal solution either. Socialists argue wealth redistribution is a better solution as then is makes individual citizens more powerful economically and gives them a bigger voice politically as they can fund political parties and elections, without the need of people like Rupert Murdoch to be involved.

[Faerlon123]

@erichargrave12 The "buying elections and politicians" thing you are talking about here is because America isn't really a democracy. It's a polyarchic state corporatist country. Yes, you can vote if you want, but it really doesn't matter, because the corporations and rich people make sure that the people they want win the election anyway. In my country we have laws against that. If you are running for Prime Minister in my country, the government pays for your campaign.

[Faerlon123]

@Jok3r115 Well, there's a lot of problems that can be picked on in my country(Norway)which runs a scandinavian welfare model. This is true, there's lots of things I don't like here that can be fixed. Like the bureaucracy for example. But seriously though, I'm kinda glad I have welfare today, because i'm jobless, and I can still keep my house, my car and internet and all these commodities. I know what you mean, but everything isn't black and white, life is a whole lot of gray too.

[erichargrave12]

An overlooked point about equality to socialists is "economic democracy".

We are all used to political democracy, one vote per person, but how can we have true democracy if there are super rich individuals/companies buying political candidates/parties by paying for their election campaigns? This money gives them more than one vote, it gives them influence and they end up dominating policy.

Socialists redistribute wealth and pass anti-monopoly laws to solve this, not to make us all the same.