Fatcatvideo.net

Title: Occupy Wall Street Declares Goldman Sachs Guilty

Description:
General Assembly holds mock trial and journalist Chris Hedges reads indictment accusing Goldman Sachs of financial crimes against humanity.

Comments:

Author: Cooltreivus

Title: haha I am from ...

Comment: haha I am from Canada so the first amendment doesn't apply but thanks anyways lol. But the problem with using China and N.Korea as examples is the fact that they are not true socialist countries, and France is in itself a heavily capitalist country. Socialism promotes democracy, and fair distribution via people owning the industries, but China and North Korea are poor examples of the socialist ideal.

Author: CaptainViral84

Title: Point taken i do ...

Comment: Point taken i do respect and honor your views do to your first amendment rights but that makes USA so special and separate us from rest of the world but at the same time look at France north korea and China is some of the countires that has pure socialism in it's form runing every thing and they are more fuck up then any thing else that is kind of my point how socialism does not work at all

Author: Cooltreivus

Title: Did you also know ...

Comment: Did you also know that not everyone is born equally, and people's lives are dictated by a multitude of socializing agents and external forces that will direct their life? People actually have very little control of the circumstances of their lives, and socialism aids by making sure everyone has equal opportunity. Capitalism in itself is extremely flawed, but maintains itself due to the application of social reform on it. Socialism by itself is unrealistic, but capitalism cannot thrive alone.

Author: CaptainViral84

Title: Did you know ...

Comment: Did you know education and health care and wealth in the USA is not a birth right you have to work for it but at the same time if Socialist system is so good of cureing all of human civilization ills and prolbems how come it fails all the time but if capitalism is so evil how come it works all the time?

Author: mphello

Title: Well said. Keep up ...

Comment: Well said. Keep up the great comments.

Author: mphello

Title: Don't blame the ...

Comment: Don't blame the communists in all levels of government who worked hard for a better future. Easy to blame those who had it hard, and made unavoidable mistakes, when you have the luxury of never having to work hard and get paid practically nothing for your labor by freeloading capitalists. Communism had NOTHING to do with anyone's deaths, because all the capitalists say that money rules, therefore, communists never had power.

Author: Cooltreivus

Title: Alright let's go ...

Comment: Alright let's go inbox this. I did mention after World War Two. I know before that, the system in USSR didn't fully develop. But after USSR showed rapid growth. I don't believe the right to health care and education is based off of how much money you have, I believe they are fundamental rights.

Author: tommydhammer

Title: The USSR eliminated ...

Comment: The USSR eliminated poverty?! How many people starved to death because of collectivization? It's estimated between 5 and 10 million. You can have good housing, education and health care in capitalist countries provided that you are willing to earn it, they're not entitlements. If you want to talk about problems with healthcare, education and housing in capitalist countries I'm more than happy to go to inbox because you can't debate with 500 characters.

Author: Cooltreivus

Title: You're looking at ...

Comment: You're looking at poverty from a western perspective, which you can't simply measure by comparing the wealth of people to Americans or British. The USSR did eliminate poverty after the second world war, ensuring everyone had housing, food, health care and education. The USA has a massive homelessness problem never experienced before, and has made it inaccessible for many people to have any health care or education beyond secondary. Socialism advocates for no poverty. Capitalism doesn't care.

Author: tommydhammer

Title: Any evidence to ...

Comment: Any evidence to back that up? Or do you seriously believe that the Soviet Union or Mao's China was more effective at alleviating poverty than the US or Britain after the industrial revolution?

Author: Cooltreivus

Title: Obviously socialism ...

Comment: Obviously socialism.

Author: tommydhammer

Title: I doubt those ...

Comment: I doubt those numbers are as high as you're making them out to be. They're eligible for handouts and food stamps, why would they not take them? And those that take them appear on government stats. The way you reduce poverty is by providing jobs, and you can't provide jobs if you're crippling businesses with massive taxes to pay for welfare. What's been more effective at alleviating poverty capitalism or socialism?

Author: tommydhammer

Title: Why are the ...

Comment: Why are the economies clapsing? Partly because governments have spent so much on welfare and disincentivised working, eventually you run out of someone else's money. And you're religious, HA! If you're so narrow minded and stupid enough to believe that crap, why should I take any of your political or economic views seriously?

Author: tommydhammer

Title: I wouldn't live ...

Comment: I wouldn't live beyond my means in the first place, I'd save money so that if I were to lose my job I'd have some money to fall back on. But if I were to lose my job, I wouldn't expect anyone else to have to pay for me. I lost MY job, why should someone have to help me if they don't want to? If they choose to then that's a different matter, I'm not opposed to charity, I'm opposed to coercion. It's funny, I wonder how generous you liberals are when it's your money that's used as entitlements!

Author: 19lfm12

Title: Dear Clueless: let ...

Comment: Dear Clueless: let us say you have a job. Buy & furnish a house. Then you lose your job & cannot get another. So you go on some form of public assistance. You still retain your possessions...house, appliances, furniture, car, etc. Size of a house is irrelevant. If you were in that position, you would want to keep your possessions too. So you could sit, sleep, cook, etc. You seem to imply that the poor should be naked & on the street. You are worse then clueless: you are immoral.

Comments:

Music Video

Life style Video

News Video Rss Feeds

Entertainment Video Rss Feeds

Comedy

Science and Tech Video