![]() |
|
|
#11 | |
|
Infamous Member
How Do You Identify?:
jenny Preferred Pronoun?:
babygirl Relationship Status:
First Lady of the United SMH Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 5,445
Thanks: 1,532
Thanked 26,553 Times in 4,688 Posts
Rep Power: 21474856 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
I just feel like capitalism is totally fine when it comes to discretionary consumption items, but it never should have been applied to staple items, justice, health, education, warfighting, or politics. And it seems willfully obtuse to insist capitalism has to be all or nothing. To insist that if we take profit out of life-or-death matters then the next thing you know we'll all have matching government haircuts and uniform scrubs, is disingenuous to the extreme, but we fall all over ourselves trying to disprove it.. The "mistake" of the mainstream dems (mistake in quotes because it is applied with the benefit of the doubt) was in believing that conservatives actually wanted the outcomes they claimed to want. Dems believed conservatives would work with them if they could get to a result that lay somewhere within the scope of what they could find tolerable. This was never going to be the case, as conservatives don't actually want any of the things they talk about. They just want wealth and power. So dems compromised themselves making a good faith argument to a bad faith premise. As i said, "mistake" gives the benefit of the doubt. Wealthy people are wealthy people first and foremost. To me it seems like the past 30 years have been "capitalism with patriarchy and white supremacy" vs "capitalism with ladies." "Capitalism with ladies" is the lesser of two evils, by far (freedom from forced birth is still a pretty good deal), but neither party wants equality.
__________________
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
| Tags |
| 2020, election |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|