B
Bolwerk
Guest
George Conklin wrote:
> "Amy Blankenship" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>> ...
>>>>>>> "exploitation of workers"? Ridiculous! It's called capitalism and
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> not exploitative. I sometimes agree with you but your wrong this
>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>> George only likes market forces when they encourage things he likes
>>>>>> anyway...
>>>>> Well doesn't everyone? That's the purpose of market forces... to
>>> encourage
>>>>> "things you like".
>>>> Amy's characterization of George is hilariously apt. He's posted
>>>> endorsing wealth redistribution away from cities. The justification?
>>>> They apparently steal from the hinterlands. Somehow.
>>> Poverty today is concentrated in rural areas. Cities have driven the
>>> price
>>> of food down, down, down.
>>> I suggest you understand the demography of poverty these days, which you
>>> obviously do not.
>> The US government and chains like Wal-Mart drive the food prices down.
>>
>
> The price paid to the farmer is down in all nations, and they don't have
> Wal-Mart to blame. Cities are the problem. Politicians are afraid of urban
> riots in the third world, and as a result poverty ends up being in rural
> areas.
No, national governments are probably to blame. Cities generally don't
farm themselves, and therefore rarely have authority to control such
matters. Maybe there's a rare case of urban areas outvoting rural ones,
but urban areas aren't even the plurality in the United States, much
less the majority.
As for third world cities, they probably often have considerably more
poverty than rural areas.
> "Amy Blankenship" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>> ...
>>>>>>> "exploitation of workers"? Ridiculous! It's called capitalism and
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> not exploitative. I sometimes agree with you but your wrong this
>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>> George only likes market forces when they encourage things he likes
>>>>>> anyway...
>>>>> Well doesn't everyone? That's the purpose of market forces... to
>>> encourage
>>>>> "things you like".
>>>> Amy's characterization of George is hilariously apt. He's posted
>>>> endorsing wealth redistribution away from cities. The justification?
>>>> They apparently steal from the hinterlands. Somehow.
>>> Poverty today is concentrated in rural areas. Cities have driven the
>>> price
>>> of food down, down, down.
>>> I suggest you understand the demography of poverty these days, which you
>>> obviously do not.
>> The US government and chains like Wal-Mart drive the food prices down.
>>
>
> The price paid to the farmer is down in all nations, and they don't have
> Wal-Mart to blame. Cities are the problem. Politicians are afraid of urban
> riots in the third world, and as a result poverty ends up being in rural
> areas.
No, national governments are probably to blame. Cities generally don't
farm themselves, and therefore rarely have authority to control such
matters. Maybe there's a rare case of urban areas outvoting rural ones,
but urban areas aren't even the plurality in the United States, much
less the majority.
As for third world cities, they probably often have considerably more
poverty than rural areas.