Lying Socialists

My Recent Posts

Funny the socialists here pontificating about how bad the world is and lead their arguments with the 0.0001% examples (one in a million).


0.0001% Examples


How terrible our capitalist world is as poverty has never been lower, worldwide, thanks to innovation motivated by profits and "greed".


The reduction of poverty today has nothing to do with socialist agendas.  It has everything to do with capitalist efficiency and capitalist driven innovation -- all for profit.  (How evil) 

Capitalism is the only proven system that has turned self-preservation, a primal mandate for individuals, into a community of sharing benefit and sharing risk.  The 0.0001% exist not because of theft, which socialist imply (some actually claim like Obama -- "you didn't build that"), but because they are rewarded by the recipients of the products they sell.  It is this simple.  Take away the rewards or the possibility of the rewards and the entire system collapses.  Innovators will not take risks if there are no rewards.


Socialist agendas, having run a full course, have never, ever raised society to anything but beggars, losers, liars, corruption, and ultimate failure.  How many more examples do we need?

The theories of Socialism only keeps surviving due to the opulent affluence of societies that can afford to ingratiate its own narcissism with a self-aggrandizing charity of someone else's fortune and future.


I am not a 0.0001% wealth owner.  Far from it.  So why would I defend the 0.0001%?  I do not.  I defend freedom, which capitalism is derived, that has produced enough charity and leisure to give socialists the time and capital to entertain delirious fantasies.

I also do not use 0.0001% examples to justify turning an entire society on its head.  This is what the ignoble will do to make claims based on emotional falsehoods.  Socialists are liars.


Thomas Sutrina Added Jan 30, 2019 - 8:06am
Spartacus, thanks.  We do have a choice: the inequality of wealth distribution or the equal distribution of misery. 
If capitalism is so odious then why do people from socialist or totalitarian state vote with their feet and walk/ ride thousands of miles to illegally come to America for ECONOMIC REASONS.  They know that they will be paid less and do jobs that Americans will not because those Americans choose welfare over hard laborious jobs.
They are leaving a nation that professes equal distribution within a class, SOCIALISM.   Please present just one socialist or totalitarian nation that does not have at least two classes of people: government and economic bureaucrats class and all others.  You see even in a socialist nation there is real inequality of wealth.  Those that make the rules do not live like those that must follow the rules.  the have equal distribution in their other class of MISERY.  
Dino Manalis Added Jan 30, 2019 - 8:33am
 Socialists mean well, but they should look at what's happening in Venezuela and avoid it, a combination of capitalism is essential to grow and pay our bills!
Ari Silverstein Added Jan 30, 2019 - 10:05am
Excellent article.  I agree with every word.  So allow me to be Devil’s advocate and issue the standard liberal response to what you wrote:
“The reduction of poverty today has nothing to do with socialist agendas.” 
Agreed.  However, we are not advocating socialism, we advocate for Democratic Socialism. As evidenced in places like Norway and Sweden, it has proven to work better than unfettered capitalism.
“The 0.0001% exist not because of theft, which socialist imply (some actually claim like Obama -- "you didn't build that"), but because they are rewarded by the recipients of the products they sell.”
Much of the wealth of the rich has been earned via illegal means including exploitation of the poor and tax evasion.  Nobody is advocating we don’t reward them for the products they sell, we dispute the degree they should be rewarded.  When failing CEO’s are rewarded with hundreds of millions of dollars, something is very wrong with the system. 
“I defend freedom, which capitalism is derived, that has produced enough charity and leisure to give socialists the time and capital to entertain delirious fantasies.”
Having three square meals, shelter and health care is not a delirious fantasy.  Sadly, as a result of unfettered capitalism, the greed of the ultra-rich will always rear its ugly head. 
White Hair'd Added Jan 30, 2019 - 10:05am
Unlike Socialism, Capitalism is not a school of thought, but is a description of an economy's natural ebb and flow of free market prices, due to supply and demand.
Socialism and all of its offshoots, is a system of top- down control of market prices and worse, control of the forces which respond to market prices. Socialism views individuals as employees of the State, with no real regard to merit of individual effort, or capabilities. Socialism is all about keeping the individual powerless and no real threat to the aristocracy, as it builds a new kingdom, called the State,  a power structure indistinguishable from any others which have ever existed.
Even A Broken Clock Added Jan 30, 2019 - 11:53am
Just a brief comment here. You note the Obama quote on "You didn't build that".  As usual in political discourse, you neglect the context and just quote the bumper sticker version. What was clear from the complete context is that even in the case of an ultra-successful entrepreneur, the infrastructure and social structure that enabled a business to be created was not due to the efforts of the entrepreneur. Instead, that social structure and infrastructure was due to having a government around and a justice system that values private property, which requires "gasp" taxation. And we all know that taxation is legalized extortion and outright theft from our billionaire class, right?
The Owl Added Jan 30, 2019 - 1:53pm
What a, Clock.
Obama meant that as a sound bite that to which he could peg his confiscatory policies.  I'm willing to bet your screen name that the response to the question was planned well in advance and just waiting for the appropriate time to spring it...Obama, if nothing else, was a calculating politician that could not do things that were off script.  Every time he did go off script, he stepped into huge piles of doo-doo that got everyone all wee-weed up.
The only nuances in his  "you didn't build it" statement are derived by his spin-meisters attempting to mitigate the damage to political aims that his sound-bite managed to do.
Thomas Sutrina Added Jan 30, 2019 - 2:13pm
Ari Silverstein, so where did you get such a myth that <<As evidenced in places like Norway and Sweden, [democratic socialist] it has proven to work better than unfettered capitalism. >>  
"In the 1960s and in the early 1970s, . . .  a welfare system was created that became a model for the rest of the world. Universal welfare financed by public means (through taxation) provided a highly developed education system, world class healthcare, pensions, a childcare system second to none, and numerous other social benefits and insurance cover. The ‘welfare state’ and the social harmony that existed in those days became known as the “Swedish model.” . . . But this Swedish model ceased to exist long time ago, reported CNN in 2003. . . Sweden has become a sort of laboratory for privatization”, commented Brian Palmer, a professor of anthropology at Sweden’s Uppsala University. Olle Wästberg, a liberal and the former Consul-General to New York, boasted that: “In many fields, we [Sweden] have more private ownership compared to other European countries, and to America. About 80 percent of all new schools are privately run, as are the railroads and the subway system.”
"Christianity at Kahlenberg Mountain near Vienna in September 1683. The battle marked the turning point in the 300 year Ottoman-Hapsburg wars with Christianity. In this instance Christianity prevailed on the European continent.
Three hundred and thirty years later Europe is once again being called on to defend its civilization against Muslims swarming into the continent at a record rate. This time two of Europe’s most affluent nations, Sweden and Germany [socialist governments] have laid out the welcome mat. . . . 
Most Italians are opposed to new arrivals. The British passed Brexit in large part to oppose the EU mandated migrant quota. Swedes have observed baseball bat wielding teenagers beating up Muslims at the Stockholm train station.
President Orban of Hungary foresees the “destruction of Europe” in this migration push, arguing it is time to push back. . . . German Prime Minister Angela Merkel was soundly defeated in local elections."
"Sweden’s recent story of migration dates back to 1975 when the national parliament [ruling Left-wing Social Democrats ] decided that the country should become multi-cultural.  . . . ‘They are ideologically committed to imposing it come what may, for the greater good, and anybody who disagrees is a fascist, a Nazi, or a racist.’ "
Dave Volek Added Jan 30, 2019 - 2:16pm
I'm just wondering if you guys could answer this bit of parodox in history.
I think you will agree that USA was more capitalist in 1900 than it is today. No socialist freeloaders and no taxes.
However, there wasn't a big middle class in the USA back then. 80% of the population lived from paycheck to paycheck just to feed their family and put a roof over their head. 
Shortly after 1900, the USA started becoming more socialist. The biggest jump was with the election of FDR in 1932.
Since then, the USA developed a thriving middle class, which has more opportunities to advance economically than the average American in 1900.
So how did this prosperity and opportunity happen--if USA has become more socialist?
Thomas Sutrina Added Jan 30, 2019 - 2:16pm
Socialist ,  Social Democrats, push their ideology which is in the end no different then the USSR or Communist China's ideology.  No different the even Islam's.
Cullen Kehoe Added Jan 30, 2019 - 2:20pm
I thought you could just tax the rich (to pay for infinite government programs). 
But I will play devil's advocate for a moment and say you've got most of a generation (Millennials) that hit adulthood during the Obama years where there were no jobs. They are stuck living with their parents until 30 years of age and paying off astronomical student loans. It seems among these youngish adults there is a sense that the system hasn't worked for them. (And they'd be right.)
Banks such as Countrywide, moronic government watchdogs, Fed chairmen, and pseudo watchdogs (rating agencies) all collectively destroyed the economy in 2008. This was largely through dishonesty / lying.
Then predictably the government came to the rescue of the Wall Street, banking folks and left the regular folks to fend for themselves--at the mercy of these same idiots who caused the crisis and were bailed out with public money. And these idiots went on the firing spree with a "screw you" attitude at the world. (I work for my shareholders only.)
I think it's possible to woo many of these Millennials over time away from these extreme views. When you get down to it, I'd suspect a lot of young people just want to move out their parents basement (and their student loan paid off). If that takes "socialism" then so be it. I'd suspect they don't care about economic theories, they just want to have the money to have a girlfriend, maybe get married one day, and buy a house. 
If Trump can deliver on the economy, he'll slowly woo many of these young socialists. 
Neil Lock Added Jan 30, 2019 - 2:34pm
Broken Clock: a justice system that values private property, which requires "gasp" taxation.
No. A justice system is, in essence, an insurance against those that wish to steal or destroy our property. So, what it requires to pay for it is an insurance premium. That is not the same as taxation. With honest insurance, there is (at least in theory) a direct relation between what you pay and what you are covered for. With taxation, quite the opposite; some king, president or Mafioso simply steals your property or earnings, and re-distributes it to his friends and cronies. You get nothing back in return; the taxes you are forced to pay are unrequited.
So, taxation as it exists today is robbery. As Franz Oppenheimer, more than a century ago, told those of us who have eyes, ears and minds, Can't you see the results? The very system, that is supposed to defend us against criminals, is used by the worst criminals to suppress us.
White Hair'd Added Jan 30, 2019 - 2:34pm
Owl, you observed Obama well.
I mean, uh, I... I, uh, we shall over... uh, I mean, I...
Someone is alleged to have embroidered a sampler for Pres. Obama:
"Avert not thine eyes from the teleprompter"
opher goodwin Added Jan 30, 2019 - 2:52pm
Ari - exactly. Scandinavia is an example to us all.
Try telling the people under the flyovers and visiting the soup kitchens and food banks, struggling in the ghettos, in the gangs and child prostitution, that capitalism is just great. They should have been smarter.
The Owl Added Jan 30, 2019 - 3:22pm
Dave V, what middle class?
The middle class was hammered by a couple of truly awful decisions by Democratic leaders that opened the floodgates for the mortgage crisis of 2008.  Bill Clinton (D-AR), with the help of Barney Frank (D-MA), brought Freddie and Fanny into the sub-prime mortgage world where the consumer pledged his future, the banks eventually got a lot of property, and people like mortgage originator Valarie Jarrett got rich skimming her origination fee off the top of mortgages that people could never afford to pay.
And the reason behind this all?  So the little guy could have a shot at homeownership.  Not really.  It was all a ploy to make Barney's boyfriend look good at his job.
How did THAT noble, and very liberal, experiment turn out?  How come Alan Greenspan was the only one talking about irrational exuberance driving the economy into a brick wall?   And how did huge stimulus, a very liberal concept, do in producing a recovery?  And where's the middle class that makes up a great swath of the political center?
Aren't you tired of having to pay for all of these failures...and the new ones that the liberal dreams up?  
I am...And it would seem that this "Green New Deal" is green only because of the greenbacks that will pay for it, and we all know where they might come from as we foist another losing program on the taxpayer.
Dave Volek Added Jan 30, 2019 - 3:30pm
Today's middle class is still more vibrant than in 1900.
But other than that, I have to agree with everything else you said. The Fannymae/Freddymac were hairbrained ideas indeed.
BTW, Canada is more socialist than the USA. If our liberals were trying to follow the US example, they were not successful in convincing our socialist government to do the same. The poor and working poor classes really can't afford their own home. They are better off renting.
edinmountainview Added Jan 30, 2019 - 3:33pm
Great article and comments.  
Semper Fi
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 30, 2019 - 3:50pm
America does not have simple Capitalism.  I will break our Capitalism into 3 categories:
Fiat Capitalism: Capitalism based on printed money backed by nothing & because the Dollar is the major currency of international exchange, we can accumulate extreme debt.
Crony Capitalism: An economy where Corporate America and the Governments (Federal, State, County and city) work in tandem to create wealth and power for some. It breeds corruption.
Predatory Capitalism: system set up to prey on the consumer Examples include Insurance simply because regulations demand it. Medical insurance to Home property tax. It also includes doing away with systems that work in order to introduce new more expensive systems. (railway system vs a car culture as one example. Replacing glass and metals with plastics. pushing Corn sugar or even tobacco products simply to make profits)
Finally if Socialism is so bad then spending trillions on Foreign policies and nations is even worse. 
Phoenix Added Jan 30, 2019 - 5:02pm
@Ari "Having three square meals, shelter and health care is not a delirious fantasy.  Sadly, as a result of unfettered capitalism, the greed of the ultra-rich will always rear its ugly head."
It is a fantasy if you want to ensure that everyone in a single country has this. The only countries that have tried had first to murder millions and then the remaining citizens queued up for bread. 
In any system, greed exists. Greed existed in Soviet Russia. Greed existed in medieval England. Greed existed in paleolithic times, because greed is a problem with the human heart. It is not created by any economic system.  
Phoenix Added Jan 30, 2019 - 5:05pm
@opher -- Since you're so concerned about these people, how much do you know about them? 
Did you know that when American states shut down the asylums, they dumped the mental patients on the streets and told them to self-medicate? So many of the homeless are actually some degree of mentally ill. So yeah, they're not going to get jobs. 
Some degree of the homeless are involved in criminal activity, such as prostitution and drugs. That makes getting a job, paying rent, pretty hard to do when you don't have paperwork from your uhm "job". These are choices people make and sometimes, that other people make fore them (a la human trafficking). 
One of the best ways to end human trafficking is to make it extremely hard to do and extremely painful if you are caught. 
You know, something like a wall might help. 
Funny how that helps with the homeless problem, isn't it?
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 30, 2019 - 5:11pm
Greed may be a common human trait but when it is out of control it needs to be reigned in. It is out of control in America. The greed of 1% has impoverished the rest in a nation whose aggregate wealth is sufficient to make all of us wealthy.
Nations like Norway took their oil profits and invested it into the people creating the world's largest wealth fund. of trillion dollars. That is a Christian act.
The richest 1% of families controlled a record-high 38.6% of the country's wealth in 2016, according to a Federal Reserve target="_blank">report published on Wednesday. That's nearly twice as much as the bottom 90%, which has seen its slice of the pie continue to shrink. The bottom 90% of families now hold just 22.8% of the wealth, down from about one-third in 1989 when the Fed started tracking this measure.
Thomas Sutrina Added Jan 30, 2019 - 5:19pm
Dave V.  Jan 30, 2019 - 2:16pm, your taking to facts and then coming to one of many conclusions.  The difference between other conclusion is additional facts. <<I think you will agree that USA was more capitalist in 1900 than it is today. No socialist freeloaders and no taxes.
However, there wasn't a big middle class in the USA back then. 80% of the population lived from paycheck to paycheck just to feed their family and put a roof over their head. 
Shortly after 1900, the USA started becoming more socialist. The biggest jump was with the election of FDR in 1932.>>
The industrialization of the nation mid point was about 1900  and one measure is the control of the steel industry  by bankers, 1901.  and the Sherman Anti-Trust Act 1911.   So Dave V. the development of the middle class accelerated along with the the industrial power which is clearly in after 1900.  
The excess wealth of the rich resulted in philanthropy.  The rich became the social warriors.  The flood of uneducated immigrants from Europe had not even peaked.  I think that it ended after the depopulation of Europe from world war one.  Jobs brought immigrants and is a measure of economic growth.  Europe recovered from  the Great depression in the middle 1930 where FDR's explosive growth in socialist policies resulted in a malaise recovery that took the break out of WWII to over power.
Thomas Sutrina Added Jan 30, 2019 - 5:22pm
David V.,  The biggest growth of the American Middle Class occurred after WWII when America stood alone as the factory for the world.  The socialist program added cost had no effect when on other nation had a functioning industrial complex.
Hussain -The Canadian Added Jan 30, 2019 - 6:16pm
What a ridiculous article, followed by equally ridiculous comments that are devoid of substance, be it factually, historically or even philosophically.
I can spend the next 2 hours debunking the nonsense above, however I'll lower my example to the United States - Spartacus obviously has no knowledge how of societies, empires, and even modern states ran/run their economies.
In the United States, a country where productivity has been increasing across the general population from the 1970s to this very day, producing the greatest wealth in the world, with an economy generating a bit over 17 trillion dollars annually, yet the purchasing power of the working class has not increased in any way to match the increase in productivity that created the above mentioned wealth.
You have a system where 1% of the population owns 40% of all private wealth; you have a system where 90% of the American citizenry owns 9% of all wealth, and 74% of all debt - What do you call this system that produces this kind of inequality, misery, and debt? What do you call a system that renders 75% of the American populace living paycheck to paycheck, and cannot afford a $400 emergency?
I don't know what kind of weed you all are smoking, but its clearly stronger than mine.
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 30, 2019 - 6:30pm
In the United States, a country where productivity has been increasing across the general population from the 1970s to this very day, producing the greatest wealth in the world, with an economy generating a bit over 17 trillion dollars annually,
and that is because this economy includes the Chinese  When Corporate America outsourced the jobs of Middle-Class America to China we have to include the Chinese worker when we factor our economy. We never do that. We should.
Corporate America suddenly added millions of highly skilled cheap labor to "our economy" by outsourcing;
That meant the savings went to the shareholders and the shift of wealth began around 1991 with outsourcing taking off. 
Corporate America created a class of super-rich who now practically control this nation.
Due to that, we have gone from a Republic to a Plutocracy ( a government run by the elite) DC is beholden to them, not to us. 
Hussain -The Canadian Added Jan 30, 2019 - 6:56pm
@Michael B Bagala
Yes indeed, im fully aware of the history of the destruction of the American middle class - This destruction included the dismantling of very factories that made the rich richer, and shipped those businesses to China, India, and any other place that is willing to offer labour for next to nothing.
This is exactly what happens when the motif is simply profits and money, uncontrolled and feted greed built on the backs of the many workers who sweated to build the American economy, only to find themselves in debt and poverty.
Capitalism and what it enables is plague on the human race and our beloved planet that is being picked clean by uncontrolled greed.
The Owl Added Jan 30, 2019 - 7:52pm
Today's middle class is still more vibrant than in 1900.  --  Dave Volek
Of course, it is, Dave.  But in 1900 the middle class didn't have either the automobile or the airplane.  They didn't have the 22 cu. ft. refrigerators or electric washers and dryers.  The pull-out bed came out of the wall.
Standards of living here in the United States and Canada have become the standards of the conditions of life.  And we all have to admit that with all the good comes with the bad.
But the essence of the argument is not to take the middle class and lower their standards of living to that of the poor, but to bring the poor into the middle class.
For better or for worse, political parties talk the good game, and over the half-century in the War on Poverty.  And, with the tens of trillions of dollars in play, we have only been successful in spending A LOT OF MONEY while achieving only a limited rise in of the life quality of the poor while slowly bleeding the middle class to the point where they are on the edge of poverty.
But in the 1900s, the poor didn't have cell phones, $650 sneakers, hooded sweatshirts.  They lived on streets littered with trash and horse manure, and few had reliable electricity if they had electricity at all.   If they wanted to get out into the countryside, they had to take a horse-drawn "bus" or walk.  Schools?  What schools? The poor of the 1900s would kill for what the poor have today; some of them actually did
It is safe to say that today's poor are far better off than the poor of the 1900s. One doesn't have to ask why the poor are so poor when one sees where the money that they are given gets spent.
This is not to say that we should back-off from the efforts to raise the poor from their poverty.  That we should never do.
But lowering standards for the rest of us for the paltry rise that we have seen just to meet government objectives with manipulated statistics doesn't help either the nation or The People.
Your argument, Dave, is wrapped in emotional blackmail, served on a silver salver, and described as worthy by one who has yet to taste it.
Socialism is as susceptible to the corruption that we see in other forms...and calling something "democratic" socialism doesn't alter the risk.  In fact, with so much more money flowing through the hands of the bureaucrat, one could reasonably argue that the risk of corruption is significantly higher.
Neither socialism or its proponents have demonstrated it can be sustained over a long term.  The ideological purity tends not to translate into a government "of the people, by the people, (and) for the people.
Can the systems in the UK, Canada, and the US be sustained over the long term?  The systems have in a fairly remarkable way.  And even with the current turmoils in the UK and the US that we see today may well topple the regimes in charge, but I doubt the "systems" will suffer much unless a bunch of people chose to use extralegal...or illegal...means to win that which they were unable to win at the ballot box.
The UK in the second half of the 20th century made an excursion into the realm of the socialist.  And while real progress was made in some areas, socialism and rule by the bureaucrat soon wore thin, and the UK returned to a more capitalist-oriented existence.
It would be unwise for a people to disregard the histories of socialist governance.  Going down that road can be both expensive and treacherous.
It never ceases to amaze me how many on the left stay wedded to their ideology even in the face of repeated disasters.  They always seem to be trying to convince themselves that "this time it will be different".  
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 30, 2019 - 7:54pm
Capitalism and what it enables is plague on the human race and our beloved planet that is being picked clean by uncontrolled greed.
Unless Capitalism is accompanied by compassion, honor, code of ethics ,. code of morals mankind suffers.
The question has to be asked, "what is the main purpose of an economy other than to serve its people?" 
If the purpose of an economy is to serve the King, the elite, the bankers or some foreign power then the people are pushed to the back of the line and face all kinds of abuse.
If the economy's main goal is to serve the people then the people's needs and wants have to be satisfied for a successful economy. Our people are wanting  in almost everything to the point that the lifespan of an American has dropped since 2016. 
Men living in the southern states have the shortest lifespan (71 to 74 years). the Average lifespan of American men is around 76. 
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 30, 2019 - 7:57pm
In combination with American women who live to 82 years and Amerian men who live to 76.4 years the average is 78 years for the population with Hawaii and some other states having an average of 80 plus years. 
Hussain -The Canadian Added Jan 30, 2019 - 8:30pm
@Michael B Bagala
Believe me Michael, I hear you, I use to believe that capitalism can be saved, all we need is a few laws here, watch-dog organizations there, maybe we can have citizen committees over looking consumer and worker conditions - but in the end, non of that worked.
The rich and powerful will undermine these protections, destroy and defang any committee that might come into existence, destroy unions, and if push come to shove, they can take the capital and move to a power nation to exploit its workers there.
Capitalism, as a system , in its very core, is a lopsided system that creates extreme inequalities, and that is a normal outcome if the goal is simply making money over every other condition.
I know we can do better than what we have now.
White Hair'd Added Jan 30, 2019 - 8:36pm
@Hussain -The Canadian,
Should we consider ourselves fortunate, to have at the table, one such as yourself, who by your own lights, is so much smarter than the rest of us?
Many people would take the chance to discover and correct errors of their own making, so please do deconstruct any flawed arguments presented earlier. After all, you said you could do so.
But the best part, must lie in future, when you shift your focus from indictment to enlightenment, giving us "the answer", aka your better idea.
Just speaking for myself, I can hardly wait to hear it.
The Owl Added Jan 30, 2019 - 9:30pm
I like the "(h)owl" bit, Jeffie, but you could have been more honorable to capitalize the "o".
But then again, honor and Jeffie are like oil and water, forever to be separate.
If you have reasoned argument to refute what is being said, it would be good...if not offer those reasoned arguments...
We are here to educate ourselves, sir, by the debate.  We could use the honor...there's that work again...of your teachings....
TexasLynn Added Jan 30, 2019 - 9:45pm
Excellent post.
I agree that a lot of socialist enjoy the luxury of naval gazing because of prosperity afforded to them by capitalism. Even the father of socialism (Marx) leeched off the Engles family fortune as he fashioned this insidious philosophy.
Socialism (and it's cousin Communism) have as their foundation an erroneous assumption that man will act against his nature and self interest. It's equivalent to basing your world view on an apple floating in mid-air when you drop it... simply because you want it to.
Spartacus Added Jan 31, 2019 - 2:55am
Great comments, people.  Thank you.  
Spartacus Added Jan 31, 2019 - 3:29am
Hussain, I know a 1%'er.  You know, one of those filthy rich people who "own 40% of the wealth" which create "inequality, misery, and debt" for the other 90% (your math is off).  A person you imply is responsible for the problems of everyone else.  Yes, I know that person very well.  I'll call him Joe.
Joe earned every penny he has -- unlike yourself who feeds on your own self-pity leaving you only with bitter cravings. 
Joe does not make me angry because he has much more wealth than I (unlike yourself).  I am responsible for my future regardless of who is more wealthy than I. 
Joe does not make me miserable in the least bit.  Joe does not make me donate to his causes.  Joe does not make me cough up a regular sum of money to give to him -- under threat of punishment. 
How about we talk about the government, Hussain.  Now that is an entity that demands me to donate to it every paycheck.  It takes 30% (or more) of everyone's income.  If you want to point to blame, look no further at the one thing that does cause 90% to live with inequality, misery, and debt. 
And you see, Hussein, this is where we differ.  Your sorry ass believes everyone else is responsible for your poor choices and your sorry life.  You think someone has to pay you for your dereliction.  You only think this because people have told you this.  And because you believed it, you are destined to be the loser in a huge crowd of losers while blaming everyone else.  
What you do not realize is that you are just a tool to those same people who NEED you to believe you are a victim.  If they can do that, which they have, you truly are living in misery at the whim of those that control your mind for their own financial benefit and political power.
Now, where were we?  Oh, yes.  So what is the problem with 1% having more wealth than your sorry ass?
Doug Plumb Added Jan 31, 2019 - 5:37am
I like cell phones and our fine clothing and shelters. I like successful people who make these things possible. No cucked socialist can ever do anything useful.
Dave Volek Added Jan 31, 2019 - 9:34am
From Owl
Your argument, Dave, is wrapped in emotional blackmail, served on a silver salver, and described as worthy by one who has yet to taste it.
Not an effective response to the challenge that USA has indeed become more socialist since 1900 and average Americans have had more prosperity and opportunities since 1900. 
TexasLynn Added Jan 31, 2019 - 10:12am
Dave V >> Not an effective response to the challenge that USA has indeed become more socialist since 1900 and average Americans have had more prosperity and opportunities since 1900.
You're offering a false correlation; more socialism = more prosperity.
We (America/USA) have been more prosperous because of the capitalist foundation set up before the socialism started creeping in.  Capitalism had about a century of a head start... thank God.  Essentially, we were/are prosperous despite socialism... not because of it.  Had the socialism not been there, we would have been even more so.
Over time (and degree implemented), socialism will undermine and destroy even the most ardent of capitalist systems; even ours.  You eventually just run out of other people's money. (paraphrasing Margaret Thatcher)
Venezuela was once South America’s richest country... what happened?  Socialism.
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 31, 2019 - 10:25am
Hussain the Canadian:
There is another side to America and that is a sense of acceptance of the state we are in. Unlike say France where people are willing to fight back, we simply don't. When outsourcing took off and the media was filled with horror stories of thousands being laid off, companies moving abroad and even Americans having to train foreigners on H1 visa to take his place, and after the foreigner is trained to do the American's job, the American is fired. ....yet no uprising. none.
While outsourcing was becoming a major force so was the internet. The internet, including so much of our culture, has taken away any desire for active action. We would rather chat this problem away. Is the act of disabling the masses deliberate? I now believe so after Pot became legal in so many states.
Now we have a massive population too high to do anything, and the more they smoke they become less mobile. They are drugged and in many ways, no different to what the British/Jews did to China under the Opium trade. 
Billions are siphoned off for pot from families who can barely make ends meet. We are becoming too medicated and by that too dependent on the government and elite, while they take the jobs and now offer "free money'.
At this point, we are losing everything from our Constitutional rights to our economic independence. Once the elite do away with cash money they completely control us. 
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 31, 2019 - 10:50am
I know several who belong to the 1%. All the industries that continue to destroy America have given mountains of money to many in that 1%. From the flesh trade, porn industry which Hollywood is the largest in the world, Pot industry, Drug industry aka Pharmaceuticals and one example the Sackler family (worth 14 billion) Purdue Pharmacies and Oxycontin that has contributed to the death of 63 thousand in 2016 and 73 thousand in 2017.
This 1% pushes products simply to make money. They hire Lobbyists to push say Corn Syrup is found in a lot of our processed food. A leading cause of diabetes.
Another example is pushing the car culture over railways. This alone requires a full article because the "car culture" is extremely wasteful and costly. It is also developing into an industry where the driver is at the mercy of satellite signals (self driving cars). Nations who have a fully developed train system are saving far more per person and per national cost of transportation. 
I am just scratching the surface of elite exploitation. Pointing to that is not envy or jealousy. It is the wise thing to do.
Hussain -The Canadian Added Jan 31, 2019 - 12:34pm
@ White Hair'd
Well thank you for the opportunity; I by no means have all the answers, to claim that I do would be hubris. I’m very much aware that a communist society can never happen, very much like Plato’s “perfect society” can never happen either, it’s a Utopian worldview that unlike many other Marxists, I do not hold. I do however believe we can create a much better economy than what we have now.
I will keep my example once again confined to the United States because most of the readers on this site seem to be American, and many of you will understand, and relate to what I’m trying to convey. There are four immediate steps I would take to start the economic reforms needed:

Immediately cut the Pentagon’s budget by $250 billion; there is zero reason why their budget is over $700 Billion, no country on the planet affords its military this insane amount of money, your senators no longer even discuss this insane budget and why is it so bloated.

Immediately create a Crown corporation (You guys can Google what that means), and have it control, budget, plan, hire, and execute a massive federal reconstruction program, something akin to what Donald Trump promised to do when he was running.

Create a Federal/People’s bank (another Crown corporation) that immediately replaces the federal reserves; a bank for the people by people, that will run the affairs of the economy, for the benefit of the economy and the citizens, not the “shareholders”.

Finally, tax the Billionaires – If you tax all of America’s Billionaires (only the billionaires), lets say at 75% after they make their $10th million dollar – Do you know how much money that puts in the government’s coffers? You do realize thats more than enough to pay off your national debt, feed, house, clothes, and employ every single American over the age of 19 right?  

If you want me to discuss more each point, on how to implement it, and run it, let me know.
Cullen Kehoe Added Jan 31, 2019 - 12:54pm
@Michael - Corn syrup is used as a sweetener (in everything) because of 200 year old subsidies to U.S. sugar farmers which makes the cost of sugar inside the U.S. double what it is on the world market (outside the U.S.). So they've found sugar substitutes. 
When I buy a Coke in New Zealand made for the Australian market, it says "cane sugar" on the ingredients. No high fructose corn syrup, which makes it marginally "less bad" for you. 
Hussain -The Canadian Added Jan 31, 2019 - 1:01pm
@ Spartacus
I knew you're full of shit, the whole time I was reading your response, I had a massive grin on my face, because you didn't answer anything or address anything, just your own illusions, delusions, and ignorance being displayed unashamed. You really have no idea what you're talking about, you created this so-called article without knowing anything about anything.
Your assumptions about me are as factually empty as your article, you don't know who I am, you have no idea what I do for a living (which might surprise you), you have no idea about the amount of "capital" I hold - Maybe the difference between me and you is that I don't lack empathy, sympathy, and general love and compassion towards my fellow citizens, who I view as my people, liberal, conservative, religious, nonreligious, I don't care about those labels.
I care about human beings not being robbed of their labour and hard work by those who employ them; the idea that everything in our economy needs to be privatized is beyond insane, and people like you who peddle this shit unchallenged need to be told to fck off- One thing that trumps platitudes is hard cold numbers, and what I presented above is beyond chilling.
You not being bothered by those numbers tells me you're a moron.
Dave Volek Added Jan 31, 2019 - 1:55pm
Before 1900, most North Americans were not prosperous. Most of us were stuck in dead end jobs that left us barely able to afford our basic needs.  Our kids had little future for much better.
It's hard to justify the improvement in lives to capitalism, when both Canada and the United States have gone further down the socialist path in the past 120 years. FDR's New Deal in the 1930's should have brought the country to its economic knees--if we are to believe conservative ideology.
Michael B Bagala
Despite the high publicity, I believe only 3% of Canadians regularly use pot. The new legality will likely mean an increase, but we will only be talking about a few percentage points.
But we have other addictions to pacify our minds: alcohol, gambling, shopping, entertainment, etc.
Dave Volek Added Jan 31, 2019 - 2:15pm
Here's another flaw to your logic.
Venezuela was only under socialist rule for 20 years. Life for average Venezuelans was better for the first 10 years. But that reversed itself.
USA has been increasingly under socialist rule for 120 years. Life for average Americans has improved in this time.
You use socialism in the Venezuela to make a point, yet ignore the socialism of the USA because it makes an opposite point.
TexasLynn Added Jan 31, 2019 - 6:23pm
Dave V >> Venezuelans was better for the first 10 years. But that reversed itself.
Dave... Venezuela had a limited amount of wealth before socialism kicked it.  It took about twenty years to transfer that wealth to the likes of Hugo Chavez and the current socialist dictator (Nicolás Maduro); who's families are now worth billions. Same pattern as Cuba.  The Venezuelan people were transformed into slaves of Chavez by... socialism.  Now... after everything has been stolen... it's all collapsing.
The U.S. had about a hundred years to wealth building and inoculation against socialism.  Granted the socialist in the U.S. (the Democrats) are trying to steal it as quickly as possible... it'll just take a little longer.  Maybe 200 or 300 years... depending on the success of their schemes.
Dave V >> You use socialism in the Venezuela to make a point, yet ignore the socialism of the USA because it makes an opposite point.
Not at all... What happened in Venezuela very much could happen here.  The Dems are trying their best... just look at likes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to see how bad it is.
Dave V >> It's hard to justify the improvement in lives to capitalism...
I don't even know how to reply to this.  Capitalism... led by the U.S. is obviously responsible for the vast majority of prosperity or progress (social, economic, quality or life) in the world over the last century.
Our system has been so resilient it has been able to withstand the viruses of socialism introduced on a regular basis... even those of FDR.  Yes... we're not as resilient today as we once were... but we've still got plenty of fight left in us.  As pessimistic as I am; we (the U.S) are still, the last, best hope for the world.  Our seeing socialism for what it is (when fewer and fewer do) a big part of that.
Mogg T >> Resulting prosperity vindicates capitalism.
It's good to have someone else confirm that they too see the obvious.  One can forget that there are others in times like these.
Michael B Bagala Added Jan 31, 2019 - 6:55pm
I really like your ideas. They are novel. I have to think about it to see how they will work, but yours so far are some of the best ideas. 
Corn Syrup and how government gets us to use it is just one example of capitalism that preys on us. Another would be inventing reasons for us to have insurance coverage. Once we get the coverage Insurance companies find ways not to pay it. 
If you were to simply total all the penalties and fees from credit card companies, banks, law enforcement etc it is a lot of money that simply bleeds out of our pockets. 
Americans who have relocated to Europe say almost in one voice that health coverage is cheaper and far better than in America. 
the 3 types of Capitalism Predatory is one that effects us all. Crony Capitalism gives Corporate America a leg up. I call it "Corporate Welfare system". Government works with Corporations so that they succeed and when they fail Government bails them out. That is not there for the average person. 
Fiat Capitalism is an economy based on simply printing the money like Monopoly. There is nothing backing our currency.
I was referring to Pot use in America not Canada. It is heavily used here and earned 9 billion in 2017, 11 billion in 2018 and will be around 21 billion in 21. That is a lot of money. You are right that Pot is only one small part of the drug recreational drug industry. 
"With estimates of $100 billion to $110 billion for heroin, $110 billion to $130 billion for cocaine, $75 billion for cannabis and $60 billion for synthetic drugs, the probable global figure for the total illicit drug industry would be approximately $360 billion  (worldometers)
That is a lot of money going to the elite and if American consumers put this much poison in their bodies routinely they are killing themselves.
That is what the Stats show. Denial is not just a river in Egypt as they say in AA meetings.  
No matter how you cut it when the lifespan starts dropping then we have a serious problem
It is not due to old age but due to a spike in death among the young. It is high enough to shorten the American lifespan to 76 years. Sri Lankan men (and women) together have a lifespan of 77.9 years. 
American men on average have a life span shorter than Sri Lankan men on average. That is due to an unhealthy lifestyle. 
My ability to live the "life deluxe" seems to be your problem. No one else cares and the fact that I have the resources to do it speaks highly of me. Also all through my life, I have managed to live the "life deluxe" and why? because I choose to. 
The Owl Added Jan 31, 2019 - 8:22pm
All of the older uber-wealthy that I know, and it is more than just a handful, are eager to spend their wealth on developing technologies that people will use as their lives unfold.  And they spend A LOT of their wealth to that end.
These are people who have used their intelligence and organizational abilities...and, yes, their wealth, to move the knowledge of man forward.  And they have used that wealth to educate people on the advances.
The current generation of wealthy, however, are not so interested in the future in gouging The People for every penny that they are worth...
Jeff Bezos and Tim Cook are right there at the top of the list.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 1, 2019 - 12:40am
The socialists sure do lie.  Huey Long was another socialist back in FDR's day.  A powerful speaker.  His idea of spread the wealth died, along with him at the hands of an assassins bullet, and now the Democrats have taken up his cry. 
Michael B Bagala Added Feb 1, 2019 - 9:48am
you sound like a bitty or better still a bitter old tick on vinegar. I will continue to narrate about my life as  others do. if you find that unbearable in any way fine with me. I am new here and people need to know about me. that is natural, your reaction is unnatural 
Bill H. Added Feb 1, 2019 - 11:00pm
But "Joe" has the power to use lobbying so that he can strip you of your rights, suck more money out of your wallet, invade your personal privacy, and basically fuck up your life for his profits (which is what most "Joes" do these days).
"Joe" will always make sure that his cash-controlled puppet will make all of the moves in his favor.
Michael B Bagala Added Feb 2, 2019 - 7:01pm
You are not indifferent.
"What really make us laugh, though, Bagala is your concluding obituary of America read against the backdrop of your self congratulating plan to flee to Italy and live the life deluxe."
Mogg where did that come from? read all my comments. they addressed America's economy. You took the statistics I put in my comments as if they are my opinion. You did that! You made it personal. Till you made your comment to me I was doing fine addressing America's economy 
Now you add another layer. Where did this come from?
"You've already shown that your defense to rebuttals of your assertions is to turn the conversation into charges of personal attacks, a minor variation on the theme of racism BLM and others use."
Mogg do you have a personal problem with me? I have none with you. I don't care to have any  issue with you.

Recent Articles by Writers Spartacus follows.