Quote (Black XistenZ @ 18 Sep 2021 02:28)
Sure, I don't disagree with any of that. The original debate, however, was whether the U.S. could look as wealthy and equitable as Norway does today if only it had distributed (the revenue from) its natural resources better - and the answer to this question is "no, not even close".
you're such a bullshitter, that was never the claim. the implication was that the US could easily afford stronger social safety nets and policies, but rejects them (thanks to both decades of propaganda, fearmongering, and disinformation, as well as being a hyper partisan de facto oligarchy, in which people can easily be manipulated into voting against their own interest just to spite the other side - not that the slightly better side wasn't also corruptly opposing such policies) by simplistically calling it "socialism", and therefore "bad".
the old "that's only possible with homogenous societies and a natural resource that yielded the country a higher per capita income than the US" (conveniently ignoring the multitude of resources, land, and all the other natural and unnatural (slavery) economic advantages the US were able to exploit historically, making it the richest country in the world) is just your usual copium. that's why none of you tried to make those excuses when i suggested to compare with germany or the uk. hackety hack...