It was the 80s, with me in my 20s.
My comment about cars came from your catagorization of the underpaid working class-type who has to take the bus everywhere. I didn't own a car during that entire decade.
While you make a good point about inequity, I'm not sure that it's symptomatic of capitalism in particular. Tell me, for instance, there were no priviledged classes in the Soviet Union, or in China today. I think it might be more properly described as a failing of human nature than as a failing of any particular economic or political arrangement. We can work to minimize the divide, but it's an uphill battle because the very existence of a schism tends to benefit those who hold the power and the purse-strings.
IMHO, what the state can legitimately strive to provide is equal opportunity for every citizen. That may be an unattainable goal, but worthy nonetheless. Our education system could also do a much better job of training students in the ways and means of capitalism. Then it's up to the individual.
Flame » in reply to What decade was it?
At the risk of answering a rhetorical question
The whole thread (41 posts)
- Who are the Democrats in 2004?
- Hmm, which portion of the greedy bastards of the country are Republicans?
- Is it the billionaire senator from Mass. or the one from New Jersey?
- re: the greedy bastards
- Apply Occam's razor
- re: the greedy bastards
- re: the greedy bastards
- Let's be Quite Blunt...
- Juvenile cracks
- re: the greedy bastards
- re: Who are the Democrats in 2004?
- Pretty dumb analysis of perfectly usable statistics. Hey Tom:
- Hmm, which portion of the greedy bastards of the country are Republicans?
