i didn't say there's no hunger in america. i said there's no starvation. you keep misrepresenting my position. i can respond to you from earlier but i blocked the sub we were in because i don't like meme subs, i prefer subs that have more text and it was spamming my feed.
Now look up deaths from exposure and please try to understand why housing for all is also necessary.
i don't think anyone thinks housing is bad or that people should die from exposure. the question is how do you plan to fix homelessness and things like that when more people die of exposure in europe than america which is generally touted as the area with the solution to the problems. i'd be okay with a government housing program that provides shelters and living for people at a bare minimum and then allow people that make more money to buy more extravagant living spaces, but we kinda already do that. it could be expanded and made easier to apply and get accepted to but that's a separate issue.
It’s simple, the Palestinians live in territory that Israel wants to take over
i mean, israel says there's a security threat. if mexico was firing rockets into the US the US would have military presence in there too. i don't know much about settlements or whatever, but it seems like you're not looking at both sides of the situation
and they’re flattening it all and killing civilians. They are murdering women and children. They are bombing hospitals and schools, they are sniping kids for fun. We have video.
not according to the civilian to combatant death ratio. every war has war crimes though. can you name me 1 war that didn't have war crimes committed in it?
We have statements of intent to exterminate them all, whether they are Hamas or not.
there are extremists but that is not the israeli governments position nor is it anywhere near the majority of israeli's position. it's a tiny minority, almost so minute that it's not even worth mentioning, like worrying about racism by the kkk in 2026.
i thought when they said housing for all they were referring to government mandated housing. im all for making houses more affordable, but that isn't really the same as houses for all. even if it's more affordable there's still going to be people that can't get a house of their own
if israel wanted to kill arabs why is 20% of their population arab? why target palestinians specifically and not arabs in general when they are the same race? what differentiates palestinians from other arabs to where israelis only want to kill palestinians but are fine in living in peace with their 20% arab population in israel?
i mean, you could say the exact same for the civilian deaths and damage to infrastructure when the US was fighting ISIS. at the end of the day they did a terrorist attack and said they were going to do it again, are harboring weapons, and are right at israel's border. they clearly have capability and intent because they fire rockets at israel all the time. what is israel supposed to do, let them fire rockets at them and not fire back? not destroy the munitions they keep in hospitals? all the deaths and the destruction of the infrastructure can be blamed on hamas, not israel. and i'm not claiming hamas does have the capability of global domination, if they did they would've done it. i'm saying they have that intent, just like ISIS did. are we supposed to not destroy them until they gain more power and do have the ability to be a threat to the world?
actually you have it the opposite. the israeli goal is to eliminate hamas (the terrorists) and live in peace and hamas's goal is the extinction of jews and then most likely global domination of islam as a whole.
no the israeli number is 1:1 and the independent sources say anywhere from 5:1 and 8:1, 8:1 being the highest estimate that i've seen. i take a middle ground between the israel number and the independent sources because it's impossible to know the exact number during an on-going war and you have two sides giving two different numbers. clearly there are two very different methodologies to get two totally different numbers and during an on-going conflict it's impossible to know who is right. but you're coming at this from a premise that israel is genocidal maniacs which is showing a bias, when the reported numbers are what determines whether they are genocidal maniacs or not. but personally, i would say even with the worse case number from people who have a bias against israel it is not genocidal.
when you fight a war who is the terrorist isnt determined by the number of people killed on each side, it's determined by the intentions of the people doing the killing. for instance, when the US went after ISIS it's estimated that between 10,000 to 27,000 ISIS were killed and only 30 US people were killed.
everyone has a right to defend themselves but the civilian to combatant death ratio is anywhere from 1:1 at the lowest to 1:8 at the highest, probably realistically 1:3 or 1:4 (normal for war). israeli does not just murder children in the streets, they are fighting a war that has civilian casualties and the numbers show that.
im all for free palestine in terms of ending the occupation, (though i think it will lead to worse outcomes and more violence, i think they should still be given that right) but in terms of the war against hamas im 100% for it and i think israel should neutralize hamas. but when most people talk about "free palestine" they mean stopping the gaza war, but i have no problem with killing terrorists.
medicare for all- good (private healthcare can still exist but a government option should be available), college for all- sounds good but has problems, housing for all- how? i think you should have to work and pay to own your own house. 32 hour work week- good, (could be even shorter), tax the rich- good, green new deal- no idea what that entails, free palestine- bad.
You're right! Poverty caused by capitalism is orders of magnitude worse! Gini coefficient is a much better way to measure poverty.
No, the Gini coefficient is not a good measure of poverty. It is a statistical tool that measures income or wealth inequality—how evenly or unevenly resources are spread across an entire population—rather than tracking who falls below a specific minimum standard of living.
i am talking about starvation, not malnutrition that's combined with other illnesses that result in death. those are two different things. starvation is a direct death due to caloric insufficiency, where you will see emaciated bodies with bloated stomachs. now, is there starvation in america?:
Pure, unadulterated starvation (absolute lack of available calories) is exceedingly rare as a direct cause of death in the United States. Instead, public health data tracks broader categories like malnutrition. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data analyzed across recent decades, tens of thousands of deaths annually (approaching or exceeding 20,000 per year) list malnutrition as a contributing or primary factor, heavily concentrated among the elderly, individuals with severe dementia, or those facing severe underlying chronic illnesses. Meanwhile, millions of Americans face Feeding America defined food insecurity (lacking consistent access to adequate food), though this rarely translates to absolute caloric starvation. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
death by starvation is NOT the same as death by malnutrition from groups with other underlying illnesses like severe dementia or the extremely elderly.
You want to define those failures?
in communism:
Scholars estimate that tens of millions of people died from man-made and politically induced starvation under 20th-century communist regimes. The vast majority of these starvation deaths occurred in China and the Soviet Union due to radical agricultural collectivization, forced grain requisitions, and failed economic social engineering projects. [1, 2]
Major Famines and Death Tolls
The Great Chinese Famine (1959–1961): Part of Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward, this disaster caused an estimated 15 to 55 million deaths, making it the largest famine in human history. [1, 2, 3, 4]
The Holodomor in Ukraine (1932–1933): Joseph Stalin's forced collectivization and confiscation of food supplies in Soviet Ukraine resulted in approximately 3.5 to 5 million deaths. [1, 2]
Soviet Famine of 1932–1933 (Overall): Beyond Ukraine, severe collectivization policies and starvation across other parts of the Soviet Union—including Kazakhstan and the North Caucasus—led to an additional 5.7 to 8.7 million total deaths. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Other Regimes: Smaller-scale or localized famines and food deprivations occurred in North Korea, Cambodia, and Ethiopia under communist or Marxist-Leninist governance. [1, 2]
notice the difference; TENS OF MILLIONS dead by STARVATION vs ten of thousands due to malnutrition. do you honestly believe people are starving to death in america? have you seen an emaciated body with a bloated stomach in america? if so, please show me it.
instead of spreading propaganda of failed systems that have proven to result in mass famine how about suggesting ways to improve the systems we currently know to work best?
lol couldn't you say gangs are more of a hobby too and not just a business run for profit? they hang out with each other, tell jokes, have an entire community and culture, their own form of language etc.
i get that lemonade stands aren't really a for profit business because they're just activities their parents let their children do for money, but the point is if you get reductive enough anything you do for money you can label a capitalist enterprise.
as a former drug user i can tell you for certain drugs are not just to deal with poverty. it's part of it but it's probably not even the majority of it. and yeah, you can say "capitalism" is the reason why jobs left michigan, but that's not an argument for communism that's an argument for better regulated capitalism. OP is comparing capitalism to communism in terms of poverty, and the poverty caused by capitalism isn't even in the same stratosphere and poverty caused by communism. communism had people starving to death, capitalism at least has keeps everyone fed. nobody starves to death in america. my point is communism doesn't work especially compared to capitalism and i was being a bit hyperbolic in my original comment. also, gangs are not solely the product of capitalism either, nor is poverty, so linking the two when communisms failures are a direct link to the problems they cause as opposed to capitalism having problems but those problems not being caused by capitalism is the difference.
how does this relate to inflation? like i know housing went up more than it should but that's still a more accurate comparison
i didn't say there's no hunger in america. i said there's no starvation. you keep misrepresenting my position. i can respond to you from earlier but i blocked the sub we were in because i don't like meme subs, i prefer subs that have more text and it was spamming my feed.
i don't think anyone thinks housing is bad or that people should die from exposure. the question is how do you plan to fix homelessness and things like that when more people die of exposure in europe than america which is generally touted as the area with the solution to the problems. i'd be okay with a government housing program that provides shelters and living for people at a bare minimum and then allow people that make more money to buy more extravagant living spaces, but we kinda already do that. it could be expanded and made easier to apply and get accepted to but that's a separate issue.
i mean, israel says there's a security threat. if mexico was firing rockets into the US the US would have military presence in there too. i don't know much about settlements or whatever, but it seems like you're not looking at both sides of the situation
not according to the civilian to combatant death ratio. every war has war crimes though. can you name me 1 war that didn't have war crimes committed in it?
there are extremists but that is not the israeli governments position nor is it anywhere near the majority of israeli's position. it's a tiny minority, almost so minute that it's not even worth mentioning, like worrying about racism by the kkk in 2026.
i thought when they said housing for all they were referring to government mandated housing. im all for making houses more affordable, but that isn't really the same as houses for all. even if it's more affordable there's still going to be people that can't get a house of their own
if israel wanted to kill arabs why is 20% of their population arab? why target palestinians specifically and not arabs in general when they are the same race? what differentiates palestinians from other arabs to where israelis only want to kill palestinians but are fine in living in peace with their 20% arab population in israel?
i mean, you could say the exact same for the civilian deaths and damage to infrastructure when the US was fighting ISIS. at the end of the day they did a terrorist attack and said they were going to do it again, are harboring weapons, and are right at israel's border. they clearly have capability and intent because they fire rockets at israel all the time. what is israel supposed to do, let them fire rockets at them and not fire back? not destroy the munitions they keep in hospitals? all the deaths and the destruction of the infrastructure can be blamed on hamas, not israel. and i'm not claiming hamas does have the capability of global domination, if they did they would've done it. i'm saying they have that intent, just like ISIS did. are we supposed to not destroy them until they gain more power and do have the ability to be a threat to the world?
actually you have it the opposite. the israeli goal is to eliminate hamas (the terrorists) and live in peace and hamas's goal is the extinction of jews and then most likely global domination of islam as a whole.
no the israeli number is 1:1 and the independent sources say anywhere from 5:1 and 8:1, 8:1 being the highest estimate that i've seen. i take a middle ground between the israel number and the independent sources because it's impossible to know the exact number during an on-going war and you have two sides giving two different numbers. clearly there are two very different methodologies to get two totally different numbers and during an on-going conflict it's impossible to know who is right. but you're coming at this from a premise that israel is genocidal maniacs which is showing a bias, when the reported numbers are what determines whether they are genocidal maniacs or not. but personally, i would say even with the worse case number from people who have a bias against israel it is not genocidal.
when you fight a war who is the terrorist isnt determined by the number of people killed on each side, it's determined by the intentions of the people doing the killing. for instance, when the US went after ISIS it's estimated that between 10,000 to 27,000 ISIS were killed and only 30 US people were killed.
everyone has a right to defend themselves but the civilian to combatant death ratio is anywhere from 1:1 at the lowest to 1:8 at the highest, probably realistically 1:3 or 1:4 (normal for war). israeli does not just murder children in the streets, they are fighting a war that has civilian casualties and the numbers show that.
im confused where did the israeli soldiers admit to targeting civilians?
im all for free palestine in terms of ending the occupation, (though i think it will lead to worse outcomes and more violence, i think they should still be given that right) but in terms of the war against hamas im 100% for it and i think israel should neutralize hamas. but when most people talk about "free palestine" they mean stopping the gaza war, but i have no problem with killing terrorists.
medicare for all- good (private healthcare can still exist but a government option should be available), college for all- sounds good but has problems, housing for all- how? i think you should have to work and pay to own your own house. 32 hour work week- good, (could be even shorter), tax the rich- good, green new deal- no idea what that entails, free palestine- bad.
No, the Gini coefficient is not a good measure of poverty. It is a statistical tool that measures income or wealth inequality—how evenly or unevenly resources are spread across an entire population—rather than tracking who falls below a specific minimum standard of living.
i am talking about starvation, not malnutrition that's combined with other illnesses that result in death. those are two different things. starvation is a direct death due to caloric insufficiency, where you will see emaciated bodies with bloated stomachs. now, is there starvation in america?:
Pure, unadulterated starvation (absolute lack of available calories) is exceedingly rare as a direct cause of death in the United States. Instead, public health data tracks broader categories like malnutrition. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data analyzed across recent decades, tens of thousands of deaths annually (approaching or exceeding 20,000 per year) list malnutrition as a contributing or primary factor, heavily concentrated among the elderly, individuals with severe dementia, or those facing severe underlying chronic illnesses. Meanwhile, millions of Americans face Feeding America defined food insecurity (lacking consistent access to adequate food), though this rarely translates to absolute caloric starvation. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
death by starvation is NOT the same as death by malnutrition from groups with other underlying illnesses like severe dementia or the extremely elderly.
in communism:
Scholars estimate that tens of millions of people died from man-made and politically induced starvation under 20th-century communist regimes. The vast majority of these starvation deaths occurred in China and the Soviet Union due to radical agricultural collectivization, forced grain requisitions, and failed economic social engineering projects. [1, 2]
Major Famines and Death Tolls
notice the difference; TENS OF MILLIONS dead by STARVATION vs ten of thousands due to malnutrition. do you honestly believe people are starving to death in america? have you seen an emaciated body with a bloated stomach in america? if so, please show me it.
instead of spreading propaganda of failed systems that have proven to result in mass famine how about suggesting ways to improve the systems we currently know to work best?
lol couldn't you say gangs are more of a hobby too and not just a business run for profit? they hang out with each other, tell jokes, have an entire community and culture, their own form of language etc.
i get that lemonade stands aren't really a for profit business because they're just activities their parents let their children do for money, but the point is if you get reductive enough anything you do for money you can label a capitalist enterprise.
i mean if you want to get that reductive little girls selling lemonade at a lemonade stand is a capitalist enterprise.
as a former drug user i can tell you for certain drugs are not just to deal with poverty. it's part of it but it's probably not even the majority of it. and yeah, you can say "capitalism" is the reason why jobs left michigan, but that's not an argument for communism that's an argument for better regulated capitalism. OP is comparing capitalism to communism in terms of poverty, and the poverty caused by capitalism isn't even in the same stratosphere and poverty caused by communism. communism had people starving to death, capitalism at least has keeps everyone fed. nobody starves to death in america. my point is communism doesn't work especially compared to capitalism and i was being a bit hyperbolic in my original comment. also, gangs are not solely the product of capitalism either, nor is poverty, so linking the two when communisms failures are a direct link to the problems they cause as opposed to capitalism having problems but those problems not being caused by capitalism is the difference.
Because poverty in Detroit is caused by gangs, drugs and low iq behavior, not capitalism
pro-communism?
Context