0x27081990

Gun control didn't help that much after all

The poorer are getting richer, too. But the rich gets richer faster. I don't see a problem with it, but it's funny to see how besides having more regulations, higher taxes and more government intervention (most of the time in the name of making society more equal) increases inequality at a faster rate just to see the very same people saying "we need higher taxes and more government intervention!"

Tax cuts always have a higher impact on the wealthy because, well, they pay more taxes.

This isn’t a bad thing. That money won’t dissapear. It’ll get spent or invested (either directly or indirectly by a bank if saved).

Tax cuts are good. Stop saying they’re bad. The wealthy always find loopholes because they can afford lawyers and accountats to deduct taxes or skip taxes through offshore companies, so it’s the not-so-wealthy who have a yet bigger impact but not so directly visible.

They closed import/export for the private sector. Only federal government handles it. Which led to export just oil (inefficiently if I may add), so when priced collapsed they had to decide if pay debt and face hunger, or fight hunger and face a financial default. Guess which one they decided?

If their economy wasn’t centrally planned and controlled by the government, it would be more resilient

There’s a lot of hate and resentment in that article. Sure, maybe Bodega isn’t the brightest startup. But who cares? If it’s a bad idea, nature/market will make it go away.

If bodegas/corner stores whatever are worth it, people will continue to buy from there and Bodega nor any other “shiny” startup will stand a chance against them.

My guess is she doesn’t believe in freemarket and thinks that someone can simply kill corner stores by throwing money at a startup.

I'm not sure it is a race issue. Times were different. People are now accepting that drug consumption doesn't make you a criminal.

At some point Britain thought that wealthy highly-educated people were incapable of being criminals, until time proved them wrong. Science is always evolving.

The only country in South America that kept loyal to the Chicago School was Chile and its results really show.

The rest is very Keynesian and it shows. I'm from South America, trust me. Saying that you're a libertarian here is taken as if saying you're a fascist. Guess who they blame for our own failures? Capitalism and imperialism, of course.

Quite the opposite. Everyone praises Karl Marx and Keynes, although they been proven wrong many times. Most Millenials think that Capitalism and freemarkets are evil, while Socialism is good. History has proven otherwise

So Milton Friedman is unrespectable?

Google and Facebook will find a way. Problem are small/young startups

I used to think the same as you when I still was a student. “How can these people critize the wonders of college? I’m learning so much!”. Then I realized I learnt nothing.

Disclaimer: it wasn’t a fancy college, but still.

I just think education needs some sort of revolution

I thought they were firm supporters of Net Neutrality. Or is this somehow different case?

Aren't you using your own version? The original meaning of left and right is the French Revolution, where people who sat on the left wanted revolution and people who sat on the right wanted to keep the status quo. People who sat in the center wanted a little bit of both. Then the definition transitioned to left being collectivism and right being capitalism.

But for some reason a good portion of academia (to not say most) labeled right as authoritarian and violent, and left as humanitarian and progressive. Hell, even Wikipedia and Google definitions says that national socialism is a far right-wing movement. So I don't blame you, definitions are a bit messy