Why are Americans so unempathatic?

About 50 years ago the US nearly tore itself apart at the seams over what it was doing in Vietnam, the fuck are you on about.

Americans are the most charitable people in the world.

>>2552264
>>2552299
This. And not just to make themselves feel better be donating 5 dollars, also the most people to go overseas and help when there is a famine or disaster. Not all, but there is no helping a lot of homeless people, they simply don't want, or squander the help. That's why you always give homeless people food instead of money, because most of them will spend it on alcohol or drugs, that's why many of them are homeless to begin with.

File: 1489522212297.png (290KB, 489x522px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 489x522px

>>2552264
stop making these threads

libertarians took over

why such a shitty ideal took over I would never know

I've noticed that leftists (the people who believe that working families should pay for the unemployed) are much, MUCH less charitable than right-wingers. Send a lone Republican and a lone Democrat past a homeless vet anf see who donates.

Coincidence?

>>2552467
I did that once

they both donated

>>2552467
Republicans just want to give away one dollar, one time, in order to feel good about themselves. The liberal will attack the roots of the problem and perhaps give a decent chunk of money every time they do taxes.

Conservative=Fake/feel good charity

Liberal=Actual commitment to a better society

>>2552366
Combination of corporate interests/brainwashing and the inherent simplicity/utopianism of the ideal.

>>2552467
>>2553907
Where's that reddit post of them talking about taking over 4chan through /his/?

I would have to disagree with you there. Perhaps a classical liberal would be more charitable. However, in modern America, both parties and their interests have evolved. Libertarians now seem to look to the government for handouts while the conservatives ask and provide hand ups.

>>2553907
Liberalism is the reason for the problem in the first place.

>>2552264
diversity

When was the last time YOU gave money to a homeless dude (it's always men)?

>>2553953
>he doesn't give them granola bars

Ha, faggot, you can't spend granola on drugs.

>>2553931
>Everyone who disagrees with me is reddit

>>2553938
Funny I don't remember liberals trying to gut every social program, spending damn near everything we had on militarization and deregulating business to the point that we are sliding back into the Guided Age.

>>2552264
They subconsciously believe in the Doctrine of Wealth so poor people must be "bad" somehow and don't "deserve" kindness or help.

>>2552327
Probably because they bunch the USA together as one country in the statistics, whereas European countries get individual entries

>>2553967
>guided age

Phoneposter detected

Also, it's military and old people, not just the military.

And military spending is awesome.

>>2553972
>Phoneposter detected
Ad hominem is widely considered a logical fallacy and is indicative of a shit argument.

>Also, it's military and old people, not just the military.
So they only kept the social programs that they use. How charitable of them.

>And military spending is awesome.
Military spending is ridiculously over-bloated. However much we may need the military, we don't need THAT much military.

>>2552264
If you want to see near zero levels of empathy, go to East Asia.

>>2553995
I'm a social democrat.

It's just that there are uppity Chinks and shit that must be kept in check by force of arms.

Also, a majority of military spending is benefits at this point. This is mainly because of all those people who got blown up in Iraq and Afghanistan. Disability benefits don't pay themselves.

When you look at what the US has to deal with, this amount of military spending is reasonable. There's a power vacuum, and if the US doesn't fill it the Russians or Chinese will.

File: mfwpointless.jpg (80KB, 445x720px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 445x720px

>>2553968
This.

Worship of the almighty dollar. Temporarily embarassed millionaire syndrome. Role models like Kanye West, Donald Trump, The Wolf of Wall Street.

Also -- and I say this as an Atheist American -- American religious values are often self-serving. Most Americans do not actually believe in the humble teachings of Christ. They believe in hiding their sins behind the worldly power of the church, and using the community of religion as a social prop, as well as a means of upward mobility and networking. They pay their tithes the same way they would pay a gym fee: Hoping they get something in return disproportional to their input.

True faith: I've never felt it, but I hope it would be independent of the fear of hell or the desire for heaven, and based on one's internal desire to do what is ethical.

But the American deficit in empathy, compassion and fellowship tells me otherwise.

There is a fundamental failure in my culture to realize that everything has a price. Everyone says it, but few actually consider it deeply when they need to.

File: Slide11.jpg (75KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 960x720px

>>2552467
Because conservatives fool themselves into thinking that they're making a difference, while the liberal knows that what you're doing is far too little, and affecting far too small a percent of the total population of homeless vets.

They need homes, they need healthcare, they need good paying jobs and decent transportation. Not what ever pity you have to pull out of your pocket and toss at them.

>>2553971
Nigga that's because the US is one country, and Europe is not

File: goyim.jpg (92KB, 879x608px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 879x608px

>>2554003
or

>>2552264
Americans are very empathetic, the problem is the economic system they use to value the world is a raging sociopath.

>>2553971
Are you retarded?

>>2553967

Social programs on their very best day, do nothing to stop poverty. Usually, they perpetuate poverty.

>>2554292
T. Comrade Tryitagainsky

>>2552264

Many of these people aren't actually veterans

>>2552366

Libertarians have never held power in the US and have never come close to holding power. You don't get 19 trillion in the red from small government.

>>2554535
Poverty is a relative thing.

Even the homeless and shiftless citizens in American society are well fed, sheltered and receive healthcare.

America really has no poverty as that seen around the rest of the world

>>2552467
"leftists" (there are not many actual leftists in america) are generally poorer, republicans have higher incomes and can afford to donate

>>2554535
This is the exact opposite of true.

America's current success is down to the wave of middle class growth created by unionization, the New Deal, and US government spending on WW2.

>>2552264
>i posted it again mom!

>>2554558

>middle class growth created by unionization

Unionization has absolutely nothing to do with the middle class.

>the New Deal

The New deal achieved precisely nothing in it's time. FDR was bailed out by WW2 destroying nearly all of the other world's manufacturers.

>US government spending on WW2.

See above. Unless the US intends to nuke several other countries with manufacturing capability on a regular basis, America's economic success after WW2 cannot be replicated through a broken window policy.

Economic activity for it's own sake is a farce.

>>2554548
You do get it from reduced government income, though.

>>2554548
Yeah you do. Libertarians just call money borrowing "getting investments" and then forget that taxes are supposed to pay for that shit.

>>2554587
>Unionization has absolutely nothing to do with the middle class

Employers will not naturally pay workers as much as they'd like.

A union forces the company to balance their bottom line with the interests of the labor force. It drives wages up.

>The New deal achieved precisely nothing in it's time

Which is why the country went back into recession in 1937 when the New Deal stopped, amirite?

WW2 was a continuation of the Keynesian stimulus of the New Deal.

The GI bill was also critical in educating and housing the American middle class, which was crucial to the post-war boom.

Market failures exist, and it's possible for governments to make profitable investments where private corporations can't.

probably because half of our income is seized by the federal government every year and redistributed 'on our behalf'

>>2554589

Which the US government hasn't done as much as it has cartoonishly increased it's spending on everything, promised it would pay for it with tax increases, then never actually get around to increasing those taxes.

>>2554600

>WW2 was a continuation of the Keynesian stimulus of the New Deal.

Did you just cite Keynesian without a hint of irony?

>>2554607
Well, it did end the Great Depression and turn South Korea, Japan, and Germany from rubble into first world states.

Laissez faire economics is the definition of "works on paper, but not in practice"

>>2554600
>It drives wages up.

also drives prices up cucklord

>>2554614
Companies don't spend 100% of their expenses on wages, and prices aren't equal to expenses.

Unionization turns corporate profits, which benefit primarily shareholders and executives (who spend less of their money and use their money less efficiently) into wages, which benefit the middle class.

When the middle class gets money, they're more likely to spend it on education, healthcare, food, that sort of thing. They also spend a higher proportion of their money overall, which drives consumption.

>but muh job creators

Here's a fun thought experiment. Imagine country A has producers and no customers. Imagine country B has customers and no producers. In country A, the factories close down. In country B, productive capacity rises to meet demand.

>>2554612

>Well, it did end the Great Depression and turn South Korea, Japan, and Germany from rubble into first world states.

Not before it in part caused a war that led to the death of millions. Therein lies the problem. Keynesian economics is unsustainable without perpetual catastrophe. That's why America and Russia's military industrial complex creates more problems than it solves. It needs those problems. There's no economic activity without those problems. But because in Keynesianism, economic activity for it's own sake is sacrosanct, You have the crisis the US is in now.

A government that spends for the sake of spending, gets into debt, has managed to convince itself that the best way to get out of debt is to spend more money it doesn't have and devalue it's currency to make it so.

https://www.philanthropy.com/interactives/how-america-gives#search
Why are Democrats so stingy?

>>2552467
Leftists are very charitable. With other peoples money, that is.

>>2553907
That is LITERALLY the complete opposite.

>>2554662
>Not before it in part caused a war that led to the death of millions

Acktually, neoclassical economics and the cyclical market failures associated with the free market triggered the fall of the Weimar government and the rise of Nazi Germany. When the markets were deregulated again in the late 90s, it triggered another global economic catastrophe.

>in Keynesianism, economic activity for it's own sake is sacrosanct

Acktually, Keynesian stimulus is supposed to take the form of public investment, so that the government can drive consumption and provide public services at the same time.

Roads need to be built, and it makes sense to build more of them during a slow economy than during a fast economy.

Purely free markets are an appealing, simple answer to economic problems, but history shows that they aren't good enough to compete with mixed economics.

>>2553961
Fat bet

>>2554673

>Roads need to be built

That is not necessarily true, but a Keynesian government doesn't care if a road in x location is truly worth it or not, which is how you get a trillion dollar "stimulus" that stimulates the most anemic economic recovery in US history.

>>2554612
>Well, it did end the Great Depression

[citation needed]

you literally couldn't be more wrong. Keynesian economics prolonged the depression

>>2552264

Would YOU donate some of YOUR money to take care of him? If not, then why do you expect anyone else to?

>>2554709
>but a Keynesian government doesn't care if a road in x location is truly worth it or not

If that's true, why would a non-Keynesian government care either?

"Spend more during recessions and less during growth" isn't a prescription for where to build bridges, it's a prescription for when to build them.

>which is how you get a trillion dollar "stimulus" that stimulates the most anemic economic recovery in US history

I'd like to point out that we have points of comparison. China and the European Union also went through the 2008 downturn. China rushed stimulus, the way America did, and they barely slowed down during the recession.

The European Union was unable to create a trillion dollar stimulus plan, due to the weakness of the ECB and the reluctance of member states. Their crisis lasted longer, and still is not completely resolved.

TL;DR neoclassical economics is an autistic oversimplification and the evidence has repeatedly shown that it doesn't work

>>2554715
Remember in 1933 when the Government seized all gold in the United States thereby completely upsetting the social order and tumbling the country into the worst parts of the Great Depression?

Fucking government gtfo REEEEEEEEE

>>2554715
If government spending prolongs depressions, then why didn't the US economy collapse after WW2?

>>2554738
>he thinks we did WWII for free

Haha we sacked Europe for our part in the war.

>>2554738

because when the war ended, the spending ended

WW2 pulled us out of the depression because it shipped 16 million young men overseas, solving the unemployment problem overnight

>>2554754
>what is the Marshall Plan

>>2554758
>because it shipped 16 million young men overseas

I don't know if you know this, but young men are good for economies.

They can work full time, and they aren't dependents that tie up more resources. One of the reasons developing economies grow so quickly is that the population is younger on average than in developed economies.

>because when the war ended, the spending ended

But shouldn't government spending ballooning to like 50% of GDP worsen the recession while it's going on? The US government spent way, way more on WW2 than the New Deal. And then there was the GI bill, and Truman having to quadruple defense spending as a result of the Cold War.

>>2554729

>isn't a prescription for where to build bridges, it's a prescription for when to build them.

On paper, in any practical application, all it ever does is promote wasteful spending. When the government says it needs to blow a trillion dollars somewhere, every scumbag politician and snake oil salesman has a project for them to "invest" in.

They say it'll create jobs and everybody goes along with it,. After all, people love job creation, even if the job creation is in the service of a project that isn't actually productive and the only thing that actually went up was the money supply.

>>2554783
>all it ever does is promote wasteful spending

Why wouldn't all infrastructure spending do this?

It's always a massive expenditure.

Are you saying that doing it in batches instead of continuously is what causes waste, because I don't know if you know this, but American infrastructure is old as fuck.

>the only thing that actually went up was the money supply

Well, Obama doubled the money supply by printing trillions of dollars. As Keynes predicted, this did not cause inflation to increase, because recessionary economies don't react to changes in the money supply the way normal ones do.

If you mean the labor supply, there was surplus labor lying around. That's literally the definition of a recession.

>>2552467
>I've noticed
I've noticed that the few times I've been asked I walked the guy into a nearby food joint and sat down with him and gave him a free meal. What the fuck have YOU done you little faggot?

>>2552264
This is a (((nation))) of ethnocentric immigrants, why would different cpecies give a shit about each other. Besides, giving moneyz to vets isn't virtue aignalling.

>>2553972
>military spending is awesome
Ah yes the biggest entitlement program in the country is the coolest thing to waste money on. The budget doesn't even need to be expanded on them anyways, those stupid faggots waste so much on literally nothing that they could cut back on the blatant corruption and incompetence and find more money to use elsewhere than they would by adding that 10% or whatever Trump wants.

>>2554836
Need more carriers, more fighter squadrons, more Brigade Combat teams.

Lord knows Europe isn't going to do it.

>>2554629
Here's a counter example, what if in country A there are people who can buy goods and you can eliminate overhead by setting up production in a different country where labor standards result in a cheaper cost to produce, to the point in which it matters little if those in the country with the factory can actually buy the goods they produce.