Want to end poverty? Promote capitalism, not socialism

[Chris]

Does it have to be one or another?

One works better. The other fails each time tried. You decide.

[Captain Obvious]

Does it have to be one or another?

Neither exist in textbook theory so the point is almost moot from a results standpoint.

Reality does not follow theory pattern, it's far more complex.

So if you cherry pick certain criteria and ignore the rest of course you can get models to do anything you want them to do

[Chris]

Neither exist in textbook theory so the point is almost moot from a results standpoint.

Reality does not follow theory pattern, it's far more complex.

So if you cherry pick certain criteria and ignore the rest of course you can get models to do anything you want them to do

Then stop looking for answers in textbook theories. I can't help you there, I don't own any.

All I can do it point to the real-world data you provided.

[Captain Obvious]

Why sort when the maps gives the answer?

What socialist nations are you even talking about?

The map does not give the answer, sort, look, learn.

@Common Sense this is the kind of cherry picking im talking about. Chris will refuse to acknowledge the data because this reality contradicts his textbook la la Land.

[Chris]

The map does not give the answer, sort, look, learn.

@Common Sense this is the kind of cherry picking im talking about. Chris will refuse to acknowledge the data because this reality contradicts his textbook la la Land.

The data is mapped. You posted it, now you want to deny it.


What socialist nations are you even talking about? How old is your textbook?

[Boris The Animal]

Does it have to be one or another?

Yes it does.

[Captain Obvious]

The data is mapped. You posted it, now you want to deny it.


What socialist nations are you even talking about? How old is your textbook?

Stop projecting, where did I deny it? I didn't, so you lied. Like any graph, the graph shows a summarized version of the underlying data but the underlying data shows far, far more than a graph can present in one snapshot. Either you don't understand that simple concept or you're dancing around and avoiding my point because you don't like it and then you're being Chris and making $#@! up about what I believe and deny.

I'm not going to get into an endless circular reference with you because you refuse to acknowledge the data that I did post in the fashion it was presented.

You're deflecting, it's what you do when people present you with facts and data that contradict your theoretical models.

Then you project. It's really a sad approach. There's a lot of good discussion about both systems that can be had but you're not going to let that happen.

[Chris]

Those lists are alphabeitcal so naturally we're low on the lists.

The poverty ranking is found in the map there:

The list is sortable.

Welcome to the 20th Century.

Fair amount of socialistic nations ahead of us.

Neither exist in textbook theory so the point is almost moot from a results standpoint.

Reality does not follow theory pattern, it's far more complex.

So if you cherry pick certain criteria and ignore the rest of course you can get models to do anything you want them to do

The map does not give the answer, sort, look, learn.

@Common Sense this is the kind of cherry picking im talking about. Chris will refuse to acknowledge the data because this reality contradicts his textbook la la Land.

Stop projecting, where did I deny it? I didn't, so you lied. Like any graph, the graph shows a summarized version of the underlying data but the underlying data shows far, far more than a graph can present in one snapshot. Either you don't understand that simple concept or you're dancing around and avoiding my point because you don't like it and then you're being Chris and making $#@! up about what I believe and deny.

I'm not going to get into an endless circular reference with you because you refuse to acknowledge the data that I did post in the fashion it was presented.

You're deflecting, it's what you do when people present you with facts and data that contradict your theoretical models.

Then you project. It's really a sad approach. There's a lot of good discussion about both systems that can be had but you're not going to let that happen.

Where did you deny it? Am I talking to a second CO?

The circular reference is to your real-world data:




So when will you start discussing, like telling us about those properous socialst nations?


BTW, I looked again now twice, the columnar data is not sortable. It's alphabetical.

[Captain Obvious]

It's sortable, my teenage kid could do it in his sleep. It's not my fault you don't understand the format. I thought you were an IT guy?

No, I'm not letting you circle jerk me, you refuse to acknowledge the data, throw as much dust around as you want, your theory is wrong.

[Chris]

It's sortable, my teenage kid could do it in his sleep. It's not my fault you don't understand the format. I thought you were an IT guy?

No, I'm not letting you circle jerk me, you refuse to acknowledge the data, throw as much dust around as you want, your theory is wrong.

Neither table is sortable:



But it is ranked in the map:




But I get it, you think you're right and I'm wrong so therefore there's something wrong with me. Yea, that's the ticket. You made a mistake reading it.


Uh, it's not a theory, it's data, real-world data. Yours. Turned hostile witness.


Contribute or move along, please.