Message from @ARockRaider
Discord ID: 651284894789402667
"Redistribution of wealth" is a rather broad term and could mean any form of taxes.
Technically you could also collectivize property and that could perhaps be considered socialist as well (if it is done involuntarily), but since it is possible to surrender property *voluntarily* to the public, property going into public ownership is not neccessarily socialist, it can just be trade (capitalism) or a donation (neither capitalism nor socialism).
only if the taxes are used to provide goods to people
food stamps are redistribution
roads are not
No, redistribution of wealth is any form of redistribution, even when it happens upwards
depends on who you ask.
If the poor are taxed and all the spoils go to the rich, that's also socialist.
well yeah
that's what such systems always end up being
just look at any socialist nation <:transdank:462401354745249792>
I mean, if the poor are being taxed, the ones doing the taxation always *somehow* happen to be rich elite.
the rich elite are the ones doing the taxation everywhere in the first place aren't they?
Yes, the poor don't do taxation because they lack the means to do so
That's why capitalism actually *gasp* favors the poor
I have always thought that free markets (aka capitalism) is good for the poor.
They indeed are, in fact socialism hurts the poor the most
but people don't like it because "the rich have so much more!"
an arguement that I don't understand in the slightest.
(with out assumeing the worst in the person makeing the arguement)
Yeah it's a psychological effect that's been researched for a while, but with no definitive conclusion. There seems to be a trend that people at the bottom are more content with being poorer, but more equal, rather than richer, but less equal.
It's not an entirely proven concept though
Yeah I mean to someone who doesn't know how wealth is created, or who needs to survive from day to day, "free stuff" surely sounds very good
One thing that desperately needs changing in the common perception is that wealth is a zero sum game
It's absolute not zero sum, and we can prove it by seeing how much wealthier capitalist-leaning nations have become over time.
that would be nice, but I don't think that would change most peoples thoughts on takeing more form a class they will never be in.
In fact all nations all over the world have become wealthier over time.
And that includes the people ate the bonttom
funny enough, it is basic math that says wealth grows.
we mine more form the ground every day, we find more use for the 'waste' every day.
Yep, efficiency has gone up a lot
speaking of, people need to chill with worrying about land fills.
right now i work hauling stuff into a land fill, they get something like 100 loads a day, most being full sized trucks.
you can't see the landfill unless you are above the tree line and even then, it would just look like a hill.
there is also next to no litter on the road leading up to it, it is all cought by the fence around the hill.
Unfortunately I've only ever learned one perspective about landfills, so idk how relevant they are atm
Is it comparable to the misconceptions about nuclear energy?
I would assume so, form what i always heard before I was working at one landfills were dirty wastefull things.
modern landfills are just big trash bags, nothing nasty gets out of them and they even give off gasses that can be burned for enegry if one wanted to do that.
I would love to see them try.
it's 7 and a half min long, but totes worth if you are at all worried about countries just flinging nukes at each other.
i'm not Trump, but my answer to North Korea makeing such a threat would be park a target in the middle of the pacific and ask them to hit it within a weak.