Capitalism's Dirty Byproduct

The nastier side... or what happens when you're purely driven by profit

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2...try-deception/ Originally Posted by WombRaider

This can happen under any economy. Capitalism isn't the culprit. Have any idea if there were any other workers who were adversely affected by this chemical? Or was he just an isolated case. Besides that, this article doesn't give any compelling evidence that the chemical this guy was exposed to was even the cause of his illness. You're trying to use this article to make a bullshit point.

Jim

I'm in the top tax bracket. Nice try, cocksucker. And I've said it before, I don't hate capitalism, but it's not built for longevity. Originally Posted by WombRaider

there is abosultely no way you are in the top tax bracket. NONE. NADA. so you are going to claim you make at least 400k a year? PROVE IT.

2015 tax brackets (for taxes due April 15, 2016)

Tax rate Single filers Married filing jointly or qualifying widow/widower Married filing separately Head of household
10% Up to $9,225 Up to $18,450 Up to $9,225 Up to $13,150
15% $9,226 to $37,450 $18,451 to $74,900 $9,226 to $37,450 $13,151 to $50,200
25% $37,451 to $90,750 $74,901 to $151,200 $37,451 to $75,600 $50,201 to $129,600
28% $90,751 to $189,300 $151,201 to $230,450 $75,601 to $115,225 $129,601 to $209,850
33% $189,301 to $411,500 $230,451 to $411,500 $115,226 to $205,750 $209,851 to $411,500
35% $411,501 to $413,200 $411,501 to $464,850 $205,751 to $232,425 $411,501 to $439,000
39.6% $413,201 or more $464,851 or more $232,426 or more $439,001 or more

And you don't care about anybody else, right? And you've just, in a nutshell, exposed one of capitalism's major flaws. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Actually it's not a flaw. Capitalism allows for anyone to be successful. You just have to have the desire and apply yourself.

You don't have anything against success, do you?

This can happen under any economy. Capitalism isn't the culprit. Have any idea if there were any other workers who were adversely affected by this chemical? Or was he just an isolated case. Besides that, this article doesn't give any compelling evidence that the chemical this guy was exposed to was even the cause of his illness. You're trying to use this article to make a bullshit point.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Doesn't even give any compelling evidence? There were peer-reviewed studies cited in the article. It's obvious you either skimmed or didn't read the entire article. I'm not using anything. Capitalism is about profit. Anything that gets in the way of profit is simply disavowed. Companies have even continued to knowingly pollute because paying the fines are cheaper than retooling and doing the right thing. It didn't happen under any economy. It happened under ours.

Actually it's not a flaw. Capitalism allows for anyone to be successful. You just have to have the desire and apply yourself.

You don't have anything against success, do you? Originally Posted by gfejunkie

The framework that capitalism in this country is built on is not equal, for starters. In THEORY it allows for anyone to be successful, but in practice, it falls short. And like socialism, it doesn't account for human nature. Greed is powerful. It allows a smaller and smaller group of people to hoard a larger and larger piece of the pie.

You hear the success stories of people who rose out of poverty or an adverse situation, but what about the millions of others who worked equally hard but were not as successful? Are those good odds? Does that show success? A veritable handful out of millions is the mark of a successful system?

If you're a minority in this country, the access to capital is not a foregone conclusion. It's harder to get people to loan you money if you're black. That's just a fact. Right there, your contention that it allows for anyone to be successful is already faltering, because as I stated, the framework is not equal. So you don't get the loan to start your own business. You end up working for someone else and doing ok, but this fallacy that you just have to work hard and apply yourself is just that, a fallacy.

The nastier side... or what happens when you're purely driven by profit

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2...try-deception/ Originally Posted by WombRaider

I'm not going to bother to read it, because I have no doubt that pollution happens.

What you - as always - fail to grasp is that the same shit happens in collectivist societies. The communist countries are all polluted shit holes. Huge tracts of land in the former Soviet Unioin can't be touched and they can SEE the air in China, especially Beijing.

And, of course, the reason for pollution in socialist countries is the same as in capitalist ones. Money.

Pollution equipment and cleanups cost money in socialist countries, too. And money is always in short supply. There is always some other competing need for it that competes with pollution controls equipment.

And pollution control will lose out to giving bigger handouts to people in socialist countries every time. Because people vote and air filters do not.

Pollution controls are needed in all economies, not just capitalist ones.

So why are you only criticizing the capitalist ones, mope?

It allows a smaller and smaller group of people to hoard a larger and larger piece of the pie. Originally Posted by WombRaider

The pie is not finite.

Doesn't even give any compelling evidence? There were peer-reviewed studies cited in the article. It's obvious you either skimmed or didn't read the entire article. I'm not using anything. Capitalism is about profit. Anything that gets in the way of profit is simply disavowed. Companies have even continued to knowingly pollute because paying the fines are cheaper than retooling and doing the right thing. It didn't happen under any economy. It happened under ours. Originally Posted by WombRaider

You can't blame Capitalism for a health related issue. The guy stated they had no suspicions of the product being harmful. It's an industry issue. Improper research or quality control measures ect. This same incident could have happened in any country that doesn't practice Capitalism. It's obvious you're trying to make the pitch that Socialism is better. Worse things have happened under Socialism than under Capitalism. Like I always say, "Be careful what you wish for", cause you might get it.

Jim

And you don't care about anybody else, right? And you've just, in a nutshell, exposed one of capitalism's major flaws. Originally Posted by WombRaider

No, numbnuts, it's a communist and socialist flaw, too.

The Chinese don't give a rat's ass if they are polluting the air on the entire planet. They are improving their standard of living even if they are shortening the lives of everyone on the planet, including the Chinese. They just suppress the bad news in the Chinese press.

And in India (socialist), they don't car either. They are making TATA Motors automobile for about $3500 in order to give as many Indian people as possible access to cars in order to grow the economy. And the way they get the price that low is to simply do away with most of the safety equipment (airbags, advanced seat belts) and the pollution controls (buh-bye catalytic converters) because that stuff costs MONEY.

So, why are you attempting to make this out to be a capitalist problem, mope?

When I saw the title I thought this was about Planned Parenthood...then I saw who posted it.

If you're a minority in this country, the access to capital is not a foregone conclusion. It's harder to get people to loan you money if you're black. That's just a fact. Right there, your contention that it allows for anyone to be successful is already faltering, because as I stated, the framework is not equal. So you don't get the loan to start your own business. You end up working for someone else and doing ok, but this fallacy that you just have to work hard and apply yourself is just that, a fallacy. Originally Posted by WombRaider

There is a giant flaw in your argument. You complain that capitalism is driven by greed. That would mean the providers of capital are greedy too. If one of them denIes a loan to a promising venture because it's minority-owned, another will step up and make the loan because it looks like a profitable lending opportunity. Greed will trump racism every time. Of course, if you give up the first time you are turned down for a loan and don't fine-tune your business proposals because you think the whole system is rigged against you, then you probably don't have the right attitude to succeed in the first place.

.

I'm in the top tax bracket. Nice try, cocksucker. And I've said it before, I don't hate capitalism, but it's not built for longevity. Originally Posted by WombRaider

the above is clearly a fiction of your own mind. this is what liars do when confronted with their own inadequacies. they LIE. you said that only as a knee jerk reaction.

it did, however give me a totally Bill And Ted like "Excellent Idea!"

while i'm no fan of Social Security for many obvious reasons we'll save for another day, let's "presume" WombBreath really is a 1 percenter as he claims .. do something for the people who aren't...

Don't claim ANY Social Security. AT ALL. just don't. leave it in the system to help keep it solvent for those who really do need it.

Does Bill Gates need Social Security? Warren Buffet? The Billery Clintons? The Bushes? NOPE. a drop in the bucket to them. or Obama either. Larry Ellison? nope.

i may just go out to change.org and start petition for just that. an Income qualifier for receiving Social Security. anyone with a net worth of say .. 5 million or higher shouldn't need it to begin with. So don't let them collect. They have to pay in,
because well .. they have to as does everyone else. (except all those illegals Trump yells about but that's also another topic for another day). Besides, to exclude high earners from Social Security would take away a large income stream into the system and well .. you never know .. people have made fortunes only to lose them. let that be a worst case fallback. Otherwise have everyone put into the system as normal but put a qualifier on receiving benefits at 62.

So .. WombBreath ... would you support such an idea?

gfe, you just nailed womby to his commie cross. he hates capitalism because he can't make money. so he wants "wealth redistribution" because even he should have a Government paid for mansion yeah? actually .. he does live in a Government sponsored mansion. too bad it's a section 8 double wide in Little Rock. it's hot today, after i cut my grass at my 3,000 sq/ft house i'll go take a dip in my cement pond to cool off. i'll be thinking of ya while i swim around womby (NOT) maybe you can go to the public pool near your double wide? they'll let you in, won't they? better still go get a kiddie pool and your rubber duckie and imagine yourself "wealthy" ahaha,


here's womby "livin' large!"
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

When woomby want's to go a swimin' up-air in Arkansas, he just pops the cover on his " concrete swimming hole" ( known to the rest of us as a septic tank ) and dives right in ! It helps HIM stay full of shit !

Sharon Lerner is a Ozombie...




Sharon Lerner is a journalist who has covered a wide range of issues of concern to women for more than a decade. She is a Senior Fellow at Demos, a progressive think tank, and is a regular contributor to a number of publications, including The American Prospect, Slate, and The Nation. She is the author of “The War on Moms: On Life in a Family-Unfriendly Nation” (Wiley, 2010), which NPR hailed as “A stinging account of how public policy and private businesses have failed to adapt to working mothers.” Her written work has appeared in The New York Times, The New York Times Magazine, The Washington Post, Salon.com, Slate, and Ms. among other publications. She has also worked as a staff producer for a national public radio show and as a reporter for The Village Voice, where she wrote two regular columns and covered women’s issues and health. She is the recipient of the 2005 Front Page Award for News Coverage, the 2005 Jane Cunningham Croly/GFWC Print Journalism Award for excellence in covering issues of concern to women; a special award from the Women and Politics Institute for coverage of women’s issues post-9/11; the Ray Brunner Science Writing Award from the American Public Health Association; and a National Headliner Award for her radio feature reporting. She lives in Brooklyn with her husband and two young sons.


Here is a great capitalist!




This long version is much better

Sharon Lerner is a Ozombie...




Sharon Lerner is a journalist who has covered a wide range of issues of concern to women for more than a decade. She is a Senior Fellow at Demos, a progressive think tank, and is a regular contributor to a number of publications, including The American Prospect, Slate, and The Nation. She is the author of “The War on Moms: On Life in a Family-Unfriendly Nation” (Wiley, 2010), which NPR hailed as “A stinging account of how public policy and private businesses have failed to adapt to working mothers.” Her written work has appeared in The New York Times, The New York Times Magazine, The Washington Post, Salon.com, Slate, and Ms. among other publications. She has also worked as a staff producer for a national public radio show and as a reporter for The Village Voice, where she wrote two regular columns and covered women’s issues and health. She is the recipient of the 2005 Front Page Award for News Coverage, the 2005 Jane Cunningham Croly/GFWC Print Journalism Award for excellence in covering issues of concern to women; a special award from the Women and Politics Institute for coverage of women’s issues post-9/11; the Ray Brunner Science Writing Award from the American Public Health Association; and a National Headliner Award for her radio feature reporting. She lives in Brooklyn with her husband and two young sons.

Obviously wombbreath got this from a RACIST website!! aahahahahahhaha.
just kidding wombbreath you know deep down i think you are a fine upstanding piece of shit.


Here is a great capitalist!





Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

fucking A!! this guy completely gets it, completely. best two things Freeman said was

1) BULLSHIT!!!
2) You and I are proof...

Emphasis on the reporter. he's clearly not worth the kind of money Freeman is, but the point is still completely valid .. the reporter, whoever this guy's name is, never heard of him before, to be making a substantial income that he likely does, and to be overall successful, is the proof.


Even Sir Chuckie gets it.




oh .. I'm sorry womby, did we hijack your thread and make you look like a dumbass shill at the same time? YES WE DID.

BONUS PLAN!