Hmm

Hmm...

Other urls found in this thread:

euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/247638/obesity-090514.pdf
bullshitexposed.com/scandinavian-socialism-debunked/
mises.org/library/sweden-myth
mises.org/blog/no-way-norway
wiki.mises.org/wiki/Scandinavia_and_the_social_state
marxists.org/portugues/marx/1867/ocapital-v1/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

what

Yes?
You grow food on farmland
You tax family people

Really makes you think

me on the left

Third world subhumans cannot into understanding of western freedom.

freedom to choose where you wanna eat :D

Okay Ivan.

""""""white"""""" castle

Really makes you think

Pic that makes non-ants think

>he doesn't understand taxes

We're not too terribly bad, but I admit we could be much better with this.

Income inequality is the biggest meme in existence
Can you even tell me why it's bad?

Is it?
Can you even tell me why its good?

wow so deep rly makes u think

Too many poor people means low tax base and weak consumption and weak growth.

>no Chick Fil-A
>no Mellow Mushroom
>no Chipotle
>no Five Guys
>listing Panda Express under """food"""

Unrest
Low consumption
Terrible life
No future, no upwards mobility, nepotism
Corruption
Poor education and health

Notice how most African shitholes are widely inequal, this is the reason of their poverty.

Their income inequality comes from rights inequality.

True fact, they are correlated

>look it up on wiki
>Ukraine has the highest income equality in the world
I call it bullshit.

when everyones poor there is no inequality

Came to post this

no, your cunt is poor cuz you're stupid animals like russians.

So income equality isn't always a good thing by default?
Also, I know that there are lots of rich people in Ukraine. There are dozens of expensive cars and "elite" real estate in cities like Kiev or Kharkov. GINI index somehow doesn't show it.

>soviet Oligarchs
Doesn't help that ruble is worthless and Ukrainians have no savings

>ruble
>in Ukraine

Was this made by banksy?

Here it doesn't.
Here if you are lazy and blame everyone else for your problems you wind up in the gutter regardless or race or creed.
That's what these ghetto fuckers can't face and blame everyone else for.
You can be as dumb as a rock here and make a good living if you work towards it and do what you have to do.
That's why so many Hispanics who start off usually with an grade school level education and not even knowing the language are blowing right by the blacks in upward mobility here.

its not good or bad, its just a mememetric that you use to understand how income is distributed
it becomes problematic if gap between rich and poor becomes too big
look at medieval feudal system, it works as long as vassal has enough food and is afraid of PiP

Are you implying Crimea is Ukrainian now?
Make up your fucking mind.

>advocating feudalism
Only on 4chins

Still 30 Ukranian things = 1 €

>describing neutrally
>advocating
*sigh*

Feudalism is the worst system there is, I don't understand how a site with a relatively poor userbase can say that inequality is good or even bearable. It should be fought.

I'm implying that Ukraine doesn't use ruble. they have hryvna. What does Crimea have to do with this?
>30 Ukranian things = 1 €
Weak currency sometimes could be a good thing for export economies. Look at China, they intentionally weakens their currency to make their products more competitive on the global market.
The bad thing is instability of your currency, not the exchange rate itself.

>It should be fought.
Why?

Because I care about the poor.

Should the people who don't care for the poor take the responsibility, too?

You'll have to google the sources, but increased inequality damages growth innovation, public health arguably even for the rich, increases violence, crime, corruption.

If you have read your Turchin, inequality is one of the main causes for the collapse of societies and equality is one of the main features of rising societies.

It also destroyes democrracy as the rich can buy the state. Meanwhile it is the redistribution of wealth and power, aas Solon did in Athens FDR in the USA, or the early Republican revolution in Rome that creates great societies.

euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/247638/obesity-090514.pdf

Hell, one of the reasons Americans are so fat is inequality.

If you care about your own well-being, yes.

>redistribution of wealth
>great societies

What does my own well-being have to do with the the poor?

>no Rallys
REEEEEE FOREIGNER

>asked the amerifat in a snarky tone as he posted from his gated community while eating hfcs snacks and listening to gunshots from across the railroad tracks

What about a mild wealth redistribution without going full autism?

>no juan maestro

Brazilians are competing with sharters for the most retarded posters

So you don't have an answer for the question without calling names? Gotcha.

He's a South Brazil sperg, just ignore him.

I'm not even from the south. Kek.

It's hilarious to see a bunch of liberal nerds' worldviews get crushed by simply asking a couple of questions, that they have to resort namecalling and memes. Your pathetic ideology is so weak you can't even bother answering them, without appealing to muh feels.

If you prefer favelas to a rich neighborhood you can't be taken seriously.

Everyone should care about the poor. And it's for the better of society.

>What does my own well-being have to do with the the poor?
You don't exist in a vaccum. The poor could very well have been you.

I'm merely asking the logic behind the French guy arguments, nothing more and nothing less. Seems like every time I get to this point in a discussion on Sup Forums it ends up like this, namecalling and memes. Just wanna understand what people think, but seems impossible.

Objectively speaking, what makes the poor being cared for beneficial to society as a whole, as well as being beneficial to an individual? These two questions are important, because the logic behind thinking of society before the individual leads to many problems and contradictions. I'll ignore the appeal to emotion fallacy.

...

> what makes the poor being cared for beneficial to society as a whole, as well as being beneficial to an individual?
Society : an equal society is a peaceful one. And also, poverty breeds unemployment, exclusion, non-integration, and create almost impossible to "clean up" area, like the favellas, or the French banlieues.

Individual : the pleasure of not seeing homeless beggars, higher wages because of no competition at the bottom, increase of general well-being, economic and personal safety

Plus having a strong social safety net is a big advantage for innovators and entrepreneurs without a penny

Do you mind giving an example of how the poor are treated in an equal society, and how the society achieved such equality? And then based off that answer, explain how the poor came to be in such situation in this equal society in the first place, for example, how they were treated in a exclusionary way to become poor?

Really coerced me to scratch the ol' noggin.

>fast food chains
As everyone knows, that's the only food in the US.

I'll take America, where people are forced to work 2 full-time jobs, with thousands of dollars in debt, with their sons having even more debt for college or healthcare. America has an usually high rate of homicide for a Western nation. Poorest and most inequal zones of the Untied States, such as Michigan (Flint, Detroit), have a very low quality of life.

Compare that to Sweden, or Norway, where people are paid to study and welfare is much more common.
Which country is the most happy ? Which country has the most students ? Which country has the best quality of life ?

It's self-evident, really. Just picture yourself poor. I believe that anyone wanting to reduce or abolish welfare should live on it for 1 month before making his mind.

>no Bojangles
Fuck off Bernd

...

>Notice how most African shitholes are widely inequal,

What about algeria, niger, mali ect ?

>Algeria
Liveable

>Niger, Mali
Notice how I said "most"

rly makes u thinqq

Living high is better

prove me wrong
>everything is nearby
>live with comrades in big house
>utilities are cheap
>you don't have to maintain shit

But according to that map, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, Liberia and Mauritania are better places to live in than say Chile, Argentina, Colombia and Brazil

I'd rather have more space, a private yard, and quiet streets.

If everyone is poor, there is no inequality + most of the wealth in those countries is unofficial/in foreign hands

The noises, though

>do you want to die 10yrs faster, or 5?

You're a cool user.

Thanks :D

Bullshit, Brazil is pretty equal :-DDD

When in doubt, blame Dilma

Is Sweden or Norway welfare sustainable?

? Of course it is.

If you are unlucky and get screwed by fate/system/criminals you end up in big american gutter of liberty and justice too. And everyone will call you lazy etc.

Norway has nice surplus

>not t. Alberto Barbosa

Can it be applied elsewhere?

(FYI, Norway isn't sustainable)

it means youre a developing country

Seems like Sup Forums doesn't do a whole lot of studying about economics. This debate is pointless. If you care enough to actually understand why Scandinavia model isn't sustainable and you should stop using it as an example, or even comparing it to the U.S., see these articles:
bullshitexposed.com/scandinavian-socialism-debunked/
mises.org/library/sweden-myth
mises.org/blog/no-way-norway
and
wiki.mises.org/wiki/Scandinavia_and_the_social_state

It has sources and has been debunked several times.

>mises.org
How very cute and adorable.
If you think the free market model is sustainable, please read this :
marxists.org/portugues/marx/1867/ocapital-v1/

Is Big Boy still even around? I thought it started dying off 20 years ago.

>Roundtable
>Foster's
>Blimpie
>Lamppost
wtf are these all in gommiefornia?

>stupid favela monkey posting bullshit opinion sites to try and debunk something that has been working better than any option in the world for the past 50 years
Best part is brasil is a shithole and you'll never escape it :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

I see literally nothing wrong with the right pic.
It's what Australia needs if non-boomers are ever going to have a chance at being home owners without moving to a rural area.

>having your own large house and plot of land is apparently anti-freedom

Curious idea of freedom you have there, does it consist of living in a smelly aluminum box in a cramped favela?

Does uniformity and order trigger you?

American-style suburbs are the most soulless things

all inhabitants on those countries are equally poor

You can't compare the US to Nordic nations in terms of quality of life. The circumstances are much different.

They're far too different historically, with one having segregation as the reason it has such high income inequality between different social stratas. Race plays a role in determining your place in society much like class does in England.

Thing is it would be nigh impossible to go the route of the Nordic countries for us. I believe a Finn once wrote something on the Atlantic about how even though the Nordic countries adopted the policies they currently have, they're not a bunch of pinkos and live like they normally do. He made some rather good points, but the end note he made is the deal killer. He mentions the taxes, which he says are somewhat comparable to what he pays in NYC (he moved to the US) and thought that it wouldn't be unreasonable if we raised taxes to that level in order to create the social programs necessary for what the Nordic countries have. While I respect the author, I can tell you that if everyone in the US was made to pay NYC-level taxes almost everyone would flip their shit immediately. There's a very strong aversion in this country to paying more taxes than what we've currently got, and many people have moved from high-tax states just to get away from that. Furthermore, Nordic style reforms would require a degree of centralization that doesn't quite exist here in the US. Though it varies throughout history, the state's have always had quite a bit of leeway in making their own policy and Nordic style reform would definitely strengthen the Feds over the States, and a lot of people would not be happy with that. On a final note, I'm worried that with the adoption of such measure we'll see an even bigger rise in the SJW cancer than what we already have.

In the end, while I actually do think some elements of the Nordic social programs are commendable and worth looking into, I highly doubt we'll ever get around to implementing anything like it.

Getting into debt for half your life to own a cookie cutter oversized shack made from the cheapest materials in the vague hope of it actually appreciating enough to pay for your retirement because your social system is a pile of shit definitely isn't the definition of freedom.

Okay, hold on, that might be financially retarded and at the same time encouraged on America, but it's not a limit to their rights if they're the ones that consciously sign the contract that says that the bank will reposes all the stupid shit you bought with their money.

>Getting into debt for half your life
They don't take mortgages out in Germany? >because your social system is a pile of shit
Wut? Social Security is one of the most efficient and secure forms of welfare the US has.

Are you getting all your news from Salon?

Poverty increases with income inequality and is literally the single most influential factor to violence and crime which worsens everyone's life quality more than the extra income for the upper half of society can make up for. Or are you seriously dumbshit enough to deduce the US's murder rate five times as high as Germany is solely the product of certain peoples' genes and not your vast lower class?

This. Rome went to shit when their middle class(the landowning farmers) disappeared, the proletarians exploded in number and the wealthy became hyper wealthy.

Complete equality is not good however as it removes incentive to improve.

>get meme replies
>"your retarded pls i want discuss"
>get serious replies
>"your'e all dumb becos i have meme studies that say your wrong"

If you've reached a situation where poor people need care you've already failed. In a successful country the poor still have enough to take care of themselves.

>and is literally the single most influential factor to violence and crime
Not really. The US has had an inverse relationship between violence and inequality in recent decades.

Violence has a lot more to do with culture and family structures than Inequality desu