Eating the meat of abused animals.

Your reply did not address obesity amoung those below the poverty line.

There is very little verifiable starvation in the United States. There may be, and is, more poverty than ever before, but those in poverty are being fed, which is something which has never before occured. Capitalism has resulted in more food feeding more people than ever before in history.

obseasty isnt proof there is to much food, and as a doctor he should know that. Its proof that there isnt enough accessable QUALITY food. If a $2 cheese burger from McDonals is all you can aford to eat then sure you will get fat but you will also be lacking in the other nutrients required for life. THATS why the lower SES groups have obseady problems. Oh and before you argue that isn't poverty the medical term isnt stavation, its malnourished which includes more than just the amount of glucose required
 
I think you'll find many, if not most, homeless are a product of things unrelated to "Capitalism" per say. My feelings are that many homeless are
- mentally unsound
- drug addicts
- abused as children
- have uncaring family
- live in large cities where community has broken down
- combination of above
- a small percentage choose to live "free" as homeless

That said, the homeless in Capitalistic countries have better access to health, food, even entertainment than your average person in communistic countries. 3 million North Koreans starved to death.
 
@Michael


Some homeless probably choose the city as their "home".​


@wynn



Maybe origin is saying there isn't such a stigma.​
 
I think you'll find many, if not most, homeless are a product of things unrelated to "Capitalism" per say. My feelings are that many homeless are
- mentally unsound
- drug addicts
- abused as children
- have uncaring family
- live in large cities where community has broken down
- combination of above
- a small percentage choose to live "free" as homeless

That said, the homeless in Capitalistic countries have better access to health, food, even entertainment than your average person in communistic countries. 3 million North Koreans starved to death.

How sad that you can't even see the problem with that statement and the fact that it is the fundermental problem.with the whole system. Just because someobe is mentally ill doesn't make them worthless, they are just as worthy as any CEO. The problem is.a system.which turns people in comodities. Once again its about country and community, not economy
 
How sad that you can't even see the problem with that statement and the fact that it is the fundermental problem.with the whole system. Just because someobe is mentally ill doesn't make them worthless, they are just as worthy as any CEO.

Where did Michael say that "just because somebody is mentally ill, they are worthless"?
 
The irony is that when personal preference to one's crude instincts (such as "it tastes nice") over ride any ethical consideration ( such as "i can eat the stuff even when watching how the animals are subject to abominable and excessively cruel treatment") one effectively becomes one of the "sheeple"
:eek:
http://www.accidentalhedonist.com/index.php/2005/06/09/foods_and_products_containing_high_fruct or Watch " Food INC " it's just not meat that is abused the american diet is a cornucopia.
 
Actually, I htink that many people eat meat not because they would like it (although they may develop a taste for it later), but because not eating meat comes with a heavy social stigma. And people, of course, wish to avoid social stigma.

That is true.
 
How sad that you can't even see the problem with that statement and the fact that it is the fundermental problem.with the whole system. Just because someobe is mentally ill doesn't make them worthless, they are just as worthy as any CEO.
The only person using the words worthless is you.

What do you mean they are just as worthy as any CEO? This makes little sense in your context. Just because someone is not worthless (worth nothing) does not mean they are "just as" worthy as a CEO. That's silly. They may be more or less worthy. It really depends on the person and the society they live in (if we agree society determines worth).

The problem is.a system.which turns people in comodities. Once again its about country and community, not economy
Again, you have things bass-ass backwards. Firstly, Capitalism is an economic system. If all things are equal it's probably the most free. Libertarianism is a philosophy. It says, among other things, people should be free to do as they would like so long as they don't act violently towards other people.

It is Communism and Socialism that turns people into commodities. As a matter of fact, it must. Data must be gathered to increase the effiency of the system. In a Communistic system perhaps you would not be doing the job you're now doing (Medical related if I recall)? The State would choose the best person for that task. Perhaps you'd be a garbage collector? Or a Farmer? Or the secretary in charge of bringing warm tea and cookies to a powerful Communist leader? Regardless, for the greater good, you'd be assigned a role in society. And, regardless if you liked it or not, humans being human would place a value on you based on your role.

You support such a demeaning system - one that history shows always fails


Lastly, you seem to be of the mind that Apple CEOs making $10 million is a zero sum game? IOWs, for them to make $10 million, you must loose $10 million. That's not actually true. They make $10 million and you inadvertently live a more prosperous life without having did anything - just for existing.

OK, one last thing, I do think banking CEOs are a different story. They used to be very useful. Now they are, on the whole, parasite that will probably need to be exterminated one way or another. We'll have to wait and see :shrug: Hopefully we can return to a real currency without the need for that :)
 
Back
Top