EU (European Nations) is envious of Canada

Youve not demonstrated that here. In fact you sound like a very skilled parrot. Able to mimick what you read without the ability to even comprehend. No one could deny that you have impressed yourself. But you are easily impressed.

 

A bland dodge! You can't deny what LIS data informs us, nor can you deny that the US has relatively low social mobility. Now please and try respond: why is it that anglo-saxon capitalism exhibits class structure rather than the mobility one expects with a society based on individualism!

 

The luxemborg study wont define "anglo Saxxon capitalism", nor "social democracy" as an economic system. And Ive now suggested 5 countries as candidates for what you define as "social democracy", and you cant admit to or identify a single one. You're still a joke.

 

Try to keep up! LIS is merely a data source that allows international comparison of poverty (avoiding the pitfalls associated with non-standardised data and discrepancies in definitions.

Don't be scared now: why is it that anglo-saxon capitalism exhibits class structure rather than the mobility one expects with a society based on individualism!?

 

I think exryone here is clear on that point. Make a point if you can while you try to develope a sense of worth by pointing out the obvious.

???Class structure doesnt inhibit mobility and is instead the different destinations of that mobility.

You cant even manage to string together a few words even to explain why you think either poverty or class structure is evidence of the lack of individualism

 

Makes your deliberate use of non-standardised data look quite appalling doesn't it?

You do have some exotic ideas. Class, by definition, hinders mobility. Bleedin obvious really!

Crikey, why do you need to be spoon fed? Seems like you struggle with the whole notion of individualism (which, if pertinent, would lead to a result much closer to a meritocracy)

 

Typical of the left and/or climate change activists. The oil companies are reclaiming the lands around the area. That location was not utilized before, basically desolate, and from what I gather, even the animals didn't habitate as much.

Following is a link to another forum about Ethical Oil, which is also required for other things, not just fuel. Would you prefer that America purchase oil from the Middle East where many people are not free, especially women. Or how about Venezuela.

http://www.bluecanada.ca/topic/20781-ethicaloilorg/page__pid__27714#entry27714

 

What silliness. Classless society would have no mobility.

You seem to have some silly idea that the absence of poverty is evidence of a meritocracy. What silliness. The social democracies you would likely point to, if you ever develop the nads to do so, likely have lower poverty because of generous entittlement payments and the lack of them is usually attributed to Anglo Saxxon capitalism. Welfare to bring people out of poverty is antithetical to a meritocracy and certainly has nothing to do with individualism and nothing to do with meritocracy. Still a joke.

 

This bubble that you've created is an impressive one. But back to reality. We know that, with individualism, mobility will naturally develop (reflecting the consequences of individual preferences and the impact of ability differences). We know that, with the US, she apes the class ridden Brits; making your claims look quite ridiculous

 

Notice how your reply doesnt even address the post of mine you chose to respond to.

 

Your post was nonsense. I've demonstrated that, but it was a tad obvious!

 

No, you avoided it. Couldnt even formulate a response so you dart after some other tangent. Typical for you.

 

Nope. It was complete drivel. I couldn't be more direct

 

You are the one with all the unsubstantiated drivel. Vague references to Luxembourg studies "demonstrate" nothing. Youve not even presented a coherent argument as to how poverty or class structure IN ANY WAY is evidence of the lack of individualism. Governmental entitlements to lift people out of poverty isnt "individualism" and is instead the essence of collectivism. And a class structure isnt evidence of the absence of mobility and the different classes are the different destinations of that mobility. A classless society would have no mobility.

 

You're not very good at the stalling and the bluff.

Reference to a data set that laughed at your copy and pasting whilst demonstrating my comments were accurate.

Back to your lack of understanding of individualism? Technically that's not your fault. You live in a class ridden society after all.

Individualism will ensure individual effort is rewarded. It will enable merit to determine result, rather than 'accidents' related to intergenerational inequalities.

Standard fallacy. I haven't referred to the effectiveness of the welfare state (although, to be fair, it can encourage entrepreneurial behaviour). I've referred to how your class ridden society twins high poverty with low social mobility. You've dodged and dodged as you haven't got a valid response.

Social mobility refers to the intergenerational income distribution. A classless society, by definition, would have substantial mobility. Zero mobility is very rare, typically restricted to concepts such as the underclass (another concept typically studied in Anglo Saxon capitalism)

 

Vague references to data sets, combined with your declarations of what they demonstrate, are as meaningless as the vague references by themselves.

 

You continue to demonstrate that you're not at all skilled in dodge and stall. I'm not sure if I'm congratulating you with that though!

By referring to LIS I demonstrated clearly how- perhaps without knowing it as you blindly copy and pasted- you misrepresented poverty comparisons (which, by definition, needs standardised data). You've since made ridiculous claims as we have two factual comments that you cannot question: First, the US apes the Brit class system in terms of social immobility. Second, that result is inconsistent with individualism (as it means that economic outcome is not based on individual preferences and ability)

 

And by standrdised you mean purposely using one measure of poverty for Portugal and a different measure in the US. Usually defining poverty as a certain percentage of the average income of the citizens of that country. For instance, defining poverty as income below 50% of the average income. Except even half the average in the USis higher than THE average in Portugal. Relative poverty is a measure of income distribution, more than it is a measure of poverty.

Really, here would have beeen a good place to identify those so called ridiculous claims.

but no, reiver doesnt like to discuss the topic of discussion and instead would rather see how long he can avoid it, while still giving a response

Well I'll wait here while you dash off to that strawman. Ive not denied any comparison between the US and UK, but we know thats exactly why you want to go there now.

No, you just keep proclaiming this as fact. Some silly belief that meritocracy leads to equality without people of different classes of financial well being.

 

Nope, meaning a data set that is capable of making cross-country comparison. Using normal national data isn't up to the job because of income definition differences and sampling issue

If you had bothered to read Smeeding you'd know that it includes absolute poverty analysis (by definition providing a poverty threshold based on fixed needs)

Technically you haven't achieved one slice of sense, from the blind copy and pasting onwards. The error over mobility and classless society was the latest 'oops' moment.

I enjoy validity. And of course you won't be able to question the factual statements provided.

Without knowing it (as you do struggle with understanding what you're typing) you've admitted that the US is class ridden and therefore inconsistent with a society based on individualism (as individual behaviour does not determine economic outcome)

Whilst you're now making misrepresentation, its at least an improvement on your poor quality dodge and stall. I haven't referred to meritocracy leading to equality. Indeed, I've stressed heterogeneity in individual behaviour and how that will generate inequalities in outcome. We would, however, have an environment with social mobility. A class based society that negates the importance of individual choice is of course inconsistent with individualism.

 

So... is the EU envious or what? Ethical Oil or Unethical fossil fuel from the Islamists? Will the majority of Americans and government accept the pipeline? Maybe there should be a refinery up north close to the border.

 

Cross country comparisons of income distribution, not poverty. Poverty in the US is close to the average income in Portugal.

Actually, I directly and clearly denied such silliness, but of course we know thats why you now want to pretend otherwise. You would rather focus upon the strawmen and irrelevant tangents, than actually address the content of the post you chose to respond to. Typical

 

Repetition in your erroneousness won't help you. I've already referred to absolute poverty, making your bland whinge about relative poverty look terribly stale.

I said "without knowing". The US apes the class ridden Brits, making the ridiculousness of your claims sing loud and clear

 

isn't everyone but T-Baggers envious of us? we get along with pretty much everyone. we don't go galloping around the globe killing in the name of Canadian interests, nor do we tend to meddle in the affairs of other countries.

We have a strong social-net that we are proud of and seems to work great...contrary to what T-Baggers will tell you.

We avoided the brunt of the US recession by simply being rational about our banking and investment regulations.

So what's not to envy? It must drive yer average cross-eyed T-Bagger nuts...lol

 

Which the luxemboug study doesnt compare so Im not sure of your point, if you even had one.

 

Being Canadian, I am biased in thinking that being born here is like winning some social lottery. We have so much to be jealous of. We are a large, sparsely populated country with more resources than we can use, incredibly high standard of living, generous social programmes and it is a good place to work and live. People from all over the world want to live and work here.

The senseless destruction of tens of thousands of kilometres of land and water to extract oil from the tarsands is not something at anyone should be jealous of. Filling the bank accounts of mostly foreign investors over a short period is going to leave a massive mess that is going to take centuries to clean up is not something to be jealous of.

I'm not saying that European governments are not self-serving hypocrites. It's funny how they call out the barbaric Canadian seal hunt, while seemingly ignoring the brutality of Spanish bullfights.

Dude, your priorities are messed up.