Show of Hands

This user is currently being ignored

Why would you care? You don’t like Hispanics anyway. And it’s not your neighborhood.

The question was about socialist tendencies, I merely pointed out that they did indeed seem to take care of each other. Or at least according to the comedian.

This user is currently being ignored

www.showofhands.mobi

This user is currently being ignored

You need a shower because you're a dirty hippie, along with all socialist-tyranny-loving-but-not-living Democrats.

I specifically made sure to say exactly why I needed to shower, anticipating an asinine, sophomoric remark like yours.

It is endemically cultural. See, I've been recommending the essay a lot but it's the one I see best suited for this: "The Economic Consequences of Economic Origins," by Rafael La Porta. Hispanic history is one of absolutism, little ownership outside the Crown, much cronyism to entrepenourship, and that was inherited to the constitutions after "independence" from Spain (which was more an internal civil war that had those consequences abroad). In Venezuela, for example, the subsoil is owned by the government, and if you find oil on your land like Rockefeller, you will not be Rockefeller but another poor peasant because the government will claim all that wealth. It's a mentality that doesn't conceive life without hyperegulations, subsidies and centralism.

Your subtext fits you perfectly, "We All Need A Fantasy" and you chose yours (which is what you are describing in your comment). The only "best" is capitalism and socialism only parasite from it. That's why the United States remains the first and not one of the first ten, but you can be happy because years of Democrat push (and to a lesser extent Republican, but there is also fault on them) have been leading the country to the abyss of bankruptcy, but even with THE SECOND BIGGEST GOVERNMENT HEALTCARE BUDGET IN TE WORLD (too much for a "privatized, predatory healthcare; that is not, btw) within the same country differences between damaged sectors intervened by the government and buoyant sectors left to the free market can be seen: www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-or-century/

That was what you were saying the last time, and I told you that it's only theory, way too entitled. I recommended you "The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins" by Rafael La Porta, because maybe he explains to you in theoretical language why the Hispanic part of the world is inherently socialist; but that excuse of most of Latin America being "dominated by conservatives parties," in addition to being false and to the few not-so-leftists governments being reversed --as in Argentina--, neglect a deeper analysis that is the high social spending, economic controls and extensive state ownership that governments continue to have in Latin America.

A "conservative" for Latin American standards is more state-leaning than a moderate Republican.

Many think they do it but they really aren't, they confuse what capitalism is and I give you an example: in my native Venezuela there has been exchange control since the discovery of oil, periods without exchange control are virtually non-existent. The strategy was to flood the domestic market with petrodollars to keep operational the artificially low dollar prices dictated by the government, and thus it tyrannically collected all the information from all businesses because buying dollars on the black market was suicidal, going bankrupt for sure. That's what China does to manipulate its currency. The socialist regime of Chavez and Maduro broke that system, and it is one of the reasons for tje extreme poverty nowadays, but when people leave the country they think they will find that prior populist system abroad, but seeing that they will live as good as they have to produce, then they collapse and want to build their "socialism that works" again. A mentality that condemns them.