the last one is clearly gary della'bate

I need two of them... one to sh*t on and one to cover it up.

These paintings are stupid beyond words.

I thought unicorns could only be ridden by virgin ladies...

Where is the one of Obama ruining the country?? Socialist....

i don't think the american right really "gets" socialism. or the severe lack of sustainability inherent in laissez-faire capitalism.

think with your head.

what the US has can hardly be called a free market. Government interference causes most of the problems the government wants to "solve"

The American Right "gets" statism and socialist programs. Don't ever think that idiots who promote it or try to denigrate capitalism by referring to it as "laissez-faire" or "unbridled" know what they're talking about. They either don't know or they're lying.
Your hope that the Right is anywhere near as ignorant as you are about economics and politics is wishful thinking and it doesn't make you look all that sharp...

Assuming that anybody doesn't understand something based on what could scarcely be considered a paragraph isn't a good idea. Whether you like it or not, capitalism is a laissez-faire system, which I am not using to mudsling. It's simply a fact that any high school student taking economics could tell you. Invisible hand runs the show with little government interference. I think smrt brings up a good point about its sustainability. Although creative destruction is pretty awesome in terms of weeding out faulty businesses, it is also that: destruction. On the other hand, from a pure economic standpoint, you can't deny the fact that socialism eliminates the incentive for workers/entrepreneurs to innovate, to invent. Incentives run the economy. So either way, both systems are flawed. Don't assail your opponents argument ad hominem by assuming they are just an idiot who doesn't know what they are talking about. Figure out what about your preferred system makes it better than the argument, and THEN try to explain why they are using faulty logic.

The fact that you even put Socialism and Capitalism on the same level doesn't say much for your knowledge of the subject. "Both systems are flawed"?? Good lord. What exactly are the flaws you've found in Capitalism, anyway? I don't mean flawed versions of it, but the system itself.

To say that Socialism is "flawed" is certainly correct, but it doesn't quite capture the essence of just how bad the system is when attempted by human beings. We don't need to even get to the "lack of innovation" part. We can start with the fact that it's impossible to budget accurately with Socialism. Then we can bring up the fact that there's no efficient way to set prices and wages under Socialism. If you've got any bright ideas along those lines you're welcome to toss them out... You'll have to be able to defeat people like Ludwig von Mises in that argument, though, and so far nobody's been able to accomplish that.

I clearly DIDNT put them on the same level, before you start thinking that your distorted interpretation of my argument leads you to believe that what I said is somehow invalidated. I juxtaposed them and showed that both have flaws in order to prove my point: moderation is the key. Neither system is without its flaws and you need a balance. Yes, capitalism is flawed. Socialism, in concept, is next to perfect. But it's no secret that in practice it has its fallacies. One of the major flaws of capitalism is that not everybody can be successful in capitalism. It defies its definition. No matter how exceptionally somebody can perform, others can outperform them. Well, that's good isn't it? By being put under pressure of competition, products improve and prices become competitive. However, unchecked capitalism (the CONCEPT you referred to, not a flawed version, which was never my argument anyway) leads to gross welfare loss. When the incomes of the people become so disparate that an overwhelming majority of people are in poverty, then you have an issue. For example, look at 18th century France. Besides monarchical debt, that particular societies major flaw was its unbalanced capitalism. And in case you weren't aware, the whole idea behind the French Revolution was the idea that the people were starving because they didn't have fair entrepreneurial opportunities. And if you prefer an example closer to home, check out America prior to anti-monopoly legislation. Not only did the people lose welfare, but the excess money in the hands of a few leaked into the government and led to corruption. Another flaw in capitalism is that once it gets going, you suffer from an economy of scale. Large corporations can run out smaller proprietorship by lowering their prices in an isolated area for a brief period of time. This isn't innovation winning. It's cut-throat greed that ruins the small-town economies and ULTIMATELY results in less GDP for the economy, pretty much defeating the point of capitalism. You are a fool to think that a pure economic system in any form isn't flawed. And the kicker is, I'm actually quite in favor of capitalism. But I'm willing to acknowledge its flaws, especially for the sake of an argument with somebody who clearly understands very little about practical economics.

My friend, you've managed to Google just enough to make yourself look silly. I can imagine what kind of instructors you've had... May I make a recommendation for you: start questioning the crap you've been fed and do some research. Your comments about both Capitalism and Socialism are straight out of the Leftist talking points folder, and don't stand up for one second against scrutiny. You know just enough to make a fool of yourself. If I were you, I'd demand my money back for that Eco 101 course...

But I'll certainly pick one and comment on it, so you can see I'm not just bouncing back meaningless rhetoric. Let's take an urban legend of a Leftist point, one which they still regularly use: that there's something wrong AT ALL with "income disparities" and their growth. You commented that "When the incomes of the people become so disparate that an overwhelming majority of people are in poverty, then you have an issue." I suppose you hoped that everyone would assume as axiomatic that "income disparity" always includes poverty. Please don't tell me that you yourself have been laboring under that myth as well...

Income disparity SHOULD increase in a healthy economic system. If it doesn't increase, that means that a top limit has been reached, and whatever the reason for that, it will ruin an economy. The bottom limit doesn't change significantly, you'll remember, because it STAYS near zero. Can't go beyond it, and you can't force people to earn more money if they don't want to earn more money. I have no idea how in the world you logically connect income disparity with poverty. There's no logical connection. And there's not much income disparity in places like Cuba and North Korea, if I'm not mistaken. There are a handful of chosen ones who take what they want, and everyone else makes pretty much the same income. Pick another point and we'll discuss that, if you like.

As far as Cuba and North Korea go, the nations are ravaged by war and dictatorships. It's impossible for an economy to grow in such conditions as that, so your example is meaningless. A healthy economy cannot possibly grow and prosper when it is in constant warfare, and market economics have no chance to grow and prosper. Just because they have the same average income, that doesn't mean they have a good economy. Compare their average income with that of America or England, they would be well below the poverty level. The massive differences in the upper and lower incomes, no matter the number of people with said income, is ridiculous.


So would you say that having a large majority of people living in poverty is acceptable? Whether almanac said is what the terminology actually is, it's obvious what he intended. When small amounts of people control massive amounts of the money, then something is wrong. Economic systems were implemented to unsure a better standard of living and easier way of doing business for everyone, not just a chosen few. With both socialism and capitalism you have that problem. The term "socialism," has become so taboo in western philosophy. It's absolutely appalling. We shouldn't be afraid to talk about anything, especially something that seems like such a panacea, but there are flaws in the system brought in by humans, and the corruption of mankind, just like in capitalism. Everything sounds wonderful in theory, but it's man that screws it up, so without rules and regulations, then nothing will work. Less than a thousand men throughout the world would be able to control 90+% of the money by colluding and dumping their products in global markets, creating world-wide monopolies, and what would the rest of man do? We would be stuck working in factories without the chance of forming a new industry, because we would be choked out the second it started. THERE lies the flaw in capitalism, which must be realized.

You sound desperate! Sad.

Desperate to do what? Your comment doesn't make a lot of sense.

Oh my god the one with Stalin and House. I wan't that shit.

Obama and the unicorn are vaultdwellers

that was the most horrible excuse for art i have ever seen

ditto

why is house in one of the paintings..?

hey , i got led to this site by mmystery google . definently the best 15 minutes ever spent . :D i mean , who doesnt love unicorns , and Obama naked , all in one picture ? haha , its great .

that was gay....

did it hurt very much when you had your lobotomy?

Really like these. Nice reference of the unicorn meaning truth and the purity of truth, and the ideal man represented by the nude in Obama, who is speaking it (it says a lot about what good things you find in his character, and how he might be tapping into a long and shared history of classical mankind and it's struggles). Also, really appreciate the references to classical artworks, for instance David's "Napolean Crossing the Alps (the post shaped like an obelisk)." Really nice stuff visualized in a very personal narrative and expressionist manner, with a clear sense of ease and comfort with the expression of emotion, idea, and concept. Carry on - maybe the world will use what you are saying about Obama and our country at the moment as an illustrated example of what is going on someday, just like we look at David now. Onward and Upward!!! Don't stop painting!!!

Yeah and Rush Limbaugh is nude too which means that he too is the ideal man!!! I never would have guessed...WOW! A MAZE ING!!!

add it's racist!

It's sad to think that this artist thinks Obama is so fantastical. His beliefs are based on his life's experiences, which were supportive, intellectual and racially confusing. His younger adult years existed to identify with his two gene pools that if mixed together many lifetimes of negative, horrible racism. The fact that his life's journey allowed him to be SO successful despite and because of his internal struggle is empowering. hence his hope slogan. ehem. Anyone who diminishes any one else's opinions, beliefs, faiths, culture, or person's identity is an immature, hopefully ignorant(otherwise just a dumbass), narrow-minded, and un-empathetic. I do hope that with new concepts we can start bringing back some family togetherness (please do not mix "family togetherness" with the "family values" term as it has connotations that I do not agree with) and rebuild America with our families, our children to be leaders to be worthy of following. It takes a nation to raise a child.

brilliant. uni is coming onto obama. especially in picture 2

It is rather weird. Though one unicorns are among other things a symbol of hope. Kinda apt really.

Who is the white chick on horse back on 7th pic? :D

Her name is America

Lady Liberty.

I took a huge dump today. there was a battleship, two destroyers and a very soft patrol boat.

lol omfg... be sure to sink your battleship

This is the dumbest shit I've ever seen other than the overtly racist White Aryan Nation crap.

this is fuckin awesome!

Our mighty bear will swallow ur sperm-coloured unicorn. Provided this lovely creature doesn't get stuffed with popcorn before that.

HAHA wtf. the only question is... WHY!?

I applaud the painter

forget politics. These are horrible paintings and should be destroyed.