Well, China in a sense But seriously, there's two separate issues from my perspective. Poverty and inequality. Poverty is bad. It's a stain on the greatness of the nation, and prevents the people from mobilizing to greater heights. Poverty should be fought, though it's merely a matter of how. Inequality I couldn't care less about. To paraphrase Thatcher, if the rich get richer by 20% and the poor by 5%, why is this a bad thing?
No he's saying the US ranks poorly with other first world nations. Unfortunately I don't think there's a YouTube video or a standing tweet for that so you may not understand.
envy, that ugly aspect of man I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think well if they attack one personally it means they have not a single political argument left. - Margaret Thatcher
I will note, Commodore, that we do differ in that I have very little problem with government programs to tackle poverty - food stamps, direct stimulus spending ( especially on infrastructre), most things depending on the circumstances, with a few things I really think are dumb like raising minimum wage. I'm not interested, however, in tampering with the economy just in the name of ridiculous and silly concepts like equality.
I don't hate Thatcher. In life, she was a polarizing figure and she is likely to remain such for history.
It's really weird. I am surprised this thread went so fast to ideological debates on wealth. Honestly I thought she was more historically significant because she was female and an "Iron Lady" But once it did, it seems to have remained civil. I guess because she is dead? I really have no idea and didn't expect it.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/9Znn5a-88tY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I am just curious, how many of you read John Rawls work and/or Marx? For the record, I read Hayek, Freeman, and as well as John Rawls and Marx.
Thatcher's statement states that if you are throwing out insults and no arguments then you must have no arguments. You prove this point by throwing out an insult (calling someone stupid) but giving no argument why he is stupid. In other word you failed to say why the statement is stupid.
Marx is one of the most influential individuals in my life, his readings really are excellent work. Not in economics, a field I have very little interest in, but from a historical viewpoint. You can't understand history without understanding Marxist historiography, and Marx was a massive influence in my turn against libertarianism, even though it was not towards Marxism and more or less towards something close but not quite fascism.
And you say you couldn't care less about inequality? I think Marx on capitalism is very much relevant today.
I didn't call him stupid. I simply quoted a famous phrase. Anyway, what would Marge say about posting youtubes, tweets, and quotes of others in lew of posting your own thoughts? I bet she would say that was an indication that you lacked the intelligence to formulate your own argument. Ya think?
