So you're saying that when someone dies their property should become state property, getting rid of inheritance altogether? No. The bloke who founded it did work hard to get where he could and he gave his money to his children, not you or anyone else, and they're getting more money from the company that is run by hard working folk who still try to meet the needs of poorer folk. You're advocating for the folk with the most guns to be the ruler of the world, you violent prick.

Also who even works sixteen hours a day at this point? The eight hour workday is by far the most common thing for workers in America, and has been for some time.

For most workers yes, but in fact the poorest parts of the US still do in fact work ridiculous hours to support the family.

Secondly, how am I advocating the folk with the most guns to be the ruler of the world?

Thirdly, I haven't made the argument to eliminate inheritance, rather I think its kinda of ridiculous that a single person can give their children so much money that 5-6 generations down the road they still don't have to work, rather I am suggesting a limit on the amount of wealth that a single person can own, as you can't do pure hard work and end up as a multibillionaire.

Lastly, while the poor may benefit from the jobs offered by the company, as the current economic situation shows that lacks to be a successful balance in regards to the extreme amount of capital made by those with the correct combination of skill, ambition, and luck to emerge at least in the US as the extremely rich.

(Secondly)Governments are monopolies of force that participate in mass extortion and enforce unjust laws that limit the freedom of folk. You are advocating for the most violent folk with the most weapons to rule society.

(Firstly)For the most poor in America, no. The poor work about eight hours a day like other folk.

(Thirdly) No. There's no moral basis for you robbing people when they're alive or dead.

(Fourthly) The poor have benefited greatly from these jobs and enjoy a higher standard of living than in most countries, why give them more money that they haven't made, when they don't need it?

Well, I give up, its completely pointless for both of us at this point.
Before this descends into a flame war, I'm pulling out.

The Basic issue is what do you view as freedom. You take the classical liberal stance of freedom being freedom from governmental control of anything. I happen to take the stance of freedom to mean freedom from poverty, and towards a more equal and just society, because I don't trust market dynamics to accomplish such a thing, whereas you do.

It's a major ideological difference, and one that isn't going to be breached by either of us or any of our allies/enemies in this argument, or probably any of them.

Wealth is blasphemy, burn the disbelievers, for life, forward green army!

Teachers really ought to be payed more here in the US. They have difficult jobs that are extremely valuable for the community, yet they get treated like shit.

it seems people are paid more in the US, because as for France, teachers are paid almost nothing.

My father is a teacher, and he is less paid than common workers even with years of work (seniors are paid more but still nothing), do you think that is normal too? Knowing you have to get at least a Master degree in France to teach, and there is a huge selection to get a post, but also young teachers are sent in "difficult" zones (Paris suburbs, I think "paying them more" is totally justified. Easy to criticize others when you do not know what you are talking about.

And Juq your comment about "researchers" and "scientists" getting less paid, I would like to get your source first before commenting it. Because again in France people working in laboratories are paid many times more than common teachers. So unless you are talking about Uni professors, that also work for research anyway (most of professors at college and uni do not only teach but also work in labs/research/etc), so I fear your comment is wrong here.

Money is a sybol for power. Only leaders can have power and teachers are always serfs.

Teachers aren't treated like shit in any discernible manner, and are well paid. And they aren't valuable to the community, they've shown that the Prussian Model is a drain on the community's resources , destroys individuality and isn't even that good at teaching.

How exactly is it based on atheism....

Socialism is more state-worship than anything else.

Hey Koala, one of my parents was a teacher too!
She didn't get paid well at all. The state of Michigan is very anti education, so they cut funding for education big time and resulted in her getting paid less and treated worse.

Teachers are invaluable for the community. We need to pass down knowledge to future generations and make sure they become productive, working members of society.

Michigan teachers are paid 42,511 dollars a year. And how good are these teachers?

http://bridgemi.com/2015/01/michigans-future-teachers-flunking-test-of-basic-content/

Apparently not that good.

So your father could support you on his income and he was way underpaid? Hah, be more mad about being born with a huge debt courtesy of the government, not because you can't be insanely rich.

Also these teachers aren't worth a crap, sorry but I'm being truthful. The comprehension level and literacy rate in the US fell because of these folk. You can squak on with your fanciful speech about how these folk are wonderful , and how they're necessary, but the facts aren't on your side.

I don't think wealth should be redistributed. As long as people are not dying from starvation, and in America they are not, it is good. Why? Because once you give them more money, they will have more children and thus create too much labor supply. This is especially true in today's world, where robots are usurping many jobs. This is another reason that we don't need mass Muslim immigration to Europe - people say the population is aging and shrinking and we need fresh blood, but that isn't true. Robots will be able to handle it. We will need only a small corps of people to operate them eventually. The sooner population starts decreasing, the better.

Admit it Major what you are advocating is pure socialism (but its worst form), going against meritocracy, teachers deserve their salary because they had to work a lot (at least in France) to achieve this, meanwhile you are against it for some reasons, I suppose you are pissed because your own teachers are bad, but still generalizing is rather stupid and childish.

Ok then, get rid of teachers, watch how immensely stupid and incompetent everyone becomes as no one teaches the population how to think for themselves allowing the government to exploit them in any way they want

“We have a bad test,” said Nancy Brown, associate dean of the School of Education and Human Services at Oakland University, where fewer than one-third of students passed the test. “We’re not going to know the best and brightest (future teachers) from this test because the test is broken.”

If you want to use a single test to overgeneralize the overall intelligence of teachers then go right on ahead.

Two other things:

-With teaching being such a crappy job it is still underpaid. You aren't going to attract the best or smartest workers like that.
-How do you make teachers smarter? MORE MONEY IN EDUCATION!

So if we get rid of Mandatory Indoctrination everyone will be stupid? It only takes a cursory glance of history to know that's simply not true. Critical thinking is beaten out of folk in mandatory education, not implanted.

Teaching in the mandatory system is a great job, you just have to do is a overview of what you're going to test on and hand out some packets, and go and inflate the grades so no one fails. You can't get fired, you can basically not do your job and walk around the Capitol with a sign so you can get more money from the tax payer and everyone will love you.

Alright so you've been funneling billions of dollars for decades into a education system , encouraging every person ever to get into college by propaganda and giving folk money to get a college degree, and now that your education system that has taken huge amounts of money (immorally and through force) and brought you a result that you absolutely hate, are you going to admit that maybe throwing huge amounts of money at the problem while demonizing blue collar labor is a bad idea? Or are you just going to poor more money into this system?