Fixed

Gross over simplification of the issue....

I'd add more, but I have to go now and earn my box...

except people have the possibility to make more money but they don't have the possibility of becoming taller

Actually, that's distribution of wealth. Which is a socialist principle that the left is often accused of supporting,

its a joke. you're going to much into it.

WELL YOU WANNA KNOW WHAT I HAVE TO SAY TO THAT YOU FAGGOT. thats perfectly a good response especially considering we are on the internet and all is good cuz you didnt thumb me down like a butt hurt lil bitch

Sounds like something a Skyrim guard would say.

I debated dppwrestler on the original post but I don't think anyone won, we just shared our points of view and he was not insulting or offensive at all which is how a debate should be.

I only deleted it for sake of thumbs which really was not much to worry about now that I look at it haha fair argument however.

There are debates and FJ now?

thumbs /=/ troll attempt

that gif. it scares me

That argument is completely retarded. Not only is murderer 1 still guilty in your scenario, it's entirely moot because Africa is and entire continent of individual 3rd world countries that has been fucked up the ass by Europe for the last couple hundred years. America on the other hand is THE world superpower and constantly spends hundreds of billions of dollars on war funding, during times of peace.

not to mention let their massive boner for "free trade capitalism" (aka pandering to the rich) fuck up almost every other economy almost as bad as their own. capitalism is great to a point, but the current laws and and way everything is set up allows corporations to basically do whatever they want, with terrible results.
i also may be more than a little upset that karl rove and his douchenozzle buddies essentially taught my country's PM how to fraudulently win an election and we're paying for it hard over here. yay right wing election fraud :3

Actualy, if we put them on a scale... Liberalism is right smack between socialism and conservatism. They try to cater to the middle-class, conservatism to the upper-class, and socialism to the lower-class, aka. The "working class".
Personaly, I'm a social liberalist, meaning I will vote for either just to help the lower and middle classes even though I'm technicly born in the upper class.

Overall, all three agree that we must change into an equal future, slowly gaining equality and erasing classes entirely, however, they have different oppinions how.
Socialists want to make the change quick, and therefore make it so taxes are at a higher precentage the more you earn every year.
Liberalists want a slower change and argue for the point that if a certain person becomes rich, his/her money will slowly flow into the rest of the society since he needs things like food and such as well, and the providers also need to spend money.
Conservatists are the only ones who don't entirely agree that the upper two are valid causes, and instead argue that things were a lot better before, since according to them, there weren't any global economical problems before 20th century.

But there's a lot more to this than just economy. Socialism wants everyone to have full access to hospitals and school without the need for insurance or money. Socialism isn't the state 'stealing' money from the people, because all of the money levied is put back into things like healthcare and schools, as well as a huge chunk going into elderly care, meaning that most of the taxes you payed as young, will be returned to you when you're older.

TL;DR- Socialism isn't evil commie stuff, there's a lot to it. Oh and Liberalism isn't in the slightest related to socialism, it's got a lot more connections to Conservatism.

whats this? someone who knows their shit on fj? first of your kind in politics here

I'm guessing by your name you're swedish?
I've learned all of this from my studies at GBskolan sollefteå. Samhäll.

Sharing wealth is just distribution of wealth and is usually a policy of a socialist government but Americans have now defined there own idea of liberalism. Google 'Modern liberalism in america' they have redefined it to mean something along the lines of left wing which is just ridiculous as left wing and liberalism are not interchangeable terms, the political compass shows this. The idea america has a true left wing party is laughable.

I'm pretty sure being conservative and libertarian values represent essentially the same everywhere .. and really? Do you still think the world revolves around your precious 'Murica?

The world does revolve around America though. Everything that happens to this country effects the whole world.

We have that in the netherlands, it sucks.

You don't really get the meaning of this, do you?

What is it then?

He is basically giving the midget what equals one of the box, but the liberals just see it as if they're cutting off his legs... you know.
Liberals see it as if taxes take something really vital from them, when actually they are just helping other people.

What?
Liberals are the ones who are a-okay with taxes. It's conservatives who hate them.
The way I see it, the conservatives are giving everybody something equal: one box. The tall guy doesn't need it. The middle guy kinda needs it. The short guy really needs two of them to be able to see. But, it's "fair", since they all got one box, but we aren't all the same, so to make things equal, you need to give everybody x boxes until they can see over the fence.
There's really no reason for them to depict the short guy getting the tall guy's legs, when most people would just take his box. He doesn't need the box. Why should he have it? The midget really needs it. He should have it.
It's a classic butthurt political comic by a conservative who is trying to demonize liberals.

Damn my ignorance.
You are actually right. It's probably because of the socialism vs liberalism where I come from, that I tend to call stuff/people, that's actually conservative, liberal.
My apologies!
But we do agree then, beside my misunderstanding with the political differences... which was a pretty big boomer.

Well, that's assuming this is American politics. Since people are playing baseball, I'm lead to believe that. I can totally understand where you can get confused. It's backwards in so many ways here. It's no problem.

Well, I originally came from a home life not far above the poverty line (to put it plainly, there were many a few days I had to sit and roll coins to help my parents pay their normal monthly payments) and have only in the past 6-8 years moved up to lowen end, upper middle class stature. What many people don't see is that taxing those who make slightly higher than the average man actually hurts that man's chance of continuing to be successful, especially if he makes his living running his own business. I explained it better in another comment, but the tax rate increase is severely more drastic to us who work hard for our living and still make it above the middle class line.

But who chooses what an equal shot is?