Ok, well, might as well address this.

Quote Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
"and the needy steal it" that sums up my view of capitalism and it's followers. the needy steal it? why are the needy stealing it? the fact that you refuse to see the good in helping the needy is why people call it greedy.
Please understand what I am arguing. This is really more than a political philosophy. You are advocating that the end justifies the means. The question is, no matter how much the poor might "need", say, Bill Gates' money, do they have the right to rip it from his "greedy", capitalist hands? Can stealing and murder and all manner of horrific ideas be justified?

No. They cannot. Not for any so-called "noble" cause nor because of the state of the poor.

and america is far from the freeist country in the world. the idea that america calls itslef the freeist society reminds me so much of oceania. (book reference, sorry). and yes america is feasting...... one of it's societies many problems. it is not something to be proud of. gluttony and waste are not plue point for a soceity were many live below the poverty line.
Please give me one country that grants more freedom to the individual, so that I can forsake America and move there.

And the rest of the world can feast, too. Unfortuantely, the governments of those countries are robbing their people blind to "line their own damn pockets with gold" (sorry, game reference =P).

letting a man spend all of his money how he wants without thoight for the good of society as a whole is known as laiisez-faire. a political though that is dead and rightly so. it consisted of leaded bread, dung heaps in cities, cholera, deaths in factories, child labour and other evils. it was not a good time. certain amounts of peoples money needs to be spent aiding the society they are part of.
Lassiez-faire capitalism has never existed. The United States, at conception, got very close - but unfortunately, welfare-statist tactics got involved, loopholes with the Constitution were found, and now America is more or less the same as every other country in the world - a mixed economy. Granted, we're doing better because we lean closer to capitalism, but really that's going to fall, as sad as it is.

Do not cite those things and blame capitalism. It was all that the country could afford at the time. Free trade would not bring back those things, of course.

And certainly, taxation is necessary. However, when government has been brought down to where it belongs - as merely a retaliatory force - then the amount of taxation needn't be so high (not to mention that all other forms of taxes spare sales tax would be abolished). An "income tax" destroys America. Look at how we're going to hell today.

you inheriet a class in all class systems. this happens in two ways. first of all buy what your paents can afford dictates your standard of living from ages 0-18, your education, health care, etc. no value is taken into how good you are, your merits, your abilities. you could be a proidigy born into a slum ridden family. you will go to an underfunded state school, if you get ill you will need to get better slowly and naturally or your parents will get into debt. in a socialist soceity this doesn't happen.
You're contradicting yourself. "Underfunded state school" is a product of socialism. If the government was at its natural level, "state schools" would be illegal. Notice how our school system is lower than it should be - this is because the State deals with it. Have you never heard about the people who rose out of poverty? That is only possible in America. Ask yourself if it is possible in a statist government. Prodigies are canned from the start.

you can inheriet a class in the class system manner which is seperate but totally unconnected but i will go into for completeness. i am upper lower class because my family is uppper lower class. if i perform well in life i could drop to middle lower class. i can not however ever become lower lower class (the underclass). it is a state of mind. if i perform well i could become as high as upper middle class. i could however never become upper class. i couldn't fit into the aristocracy. this class system is not based on money, it is a society grouo. for instance bill gates not upper class, he is still middle class. the queen is upper class, lords are upper class, lawyers and doctors are middle class. does that make sense to people who aren't used to the society class system?
Sure it makes sense. But who in the hell cares? Free trade - and individual rights - destroys class system mentality.

also socialist society's do not mean poorer quality. look at cuba's education system and health care. superior to everything we have here. and everyone is entitled to it? isn't that what we should be aiming for? the pro's of cuban society? for absolutley everyone to be given the best chances in life as a birth right?
Well, first off, Cuba's health care isn't superior to America's system.

The only system that can give the "greatest good to the greatest number" is capitalism. Socialism can be seen at first as what one should aim for, but once you realize that it ultimately fails as seeing people as people and seeing people as a member of the collective, all of its fallacies appear. Everyone has the best chances in a free society. If I was born to a poor family, I could rise above it the best to my ability.

By and by, are you American?