"I believe in things that work".

Never heard of Dave Ramsey. He's great.

His knocking-away-the-bullshit approach -- i.e. plainly, factually stating the undeniable facts that have been largely "disappeared" by the usual suspects in the media party -- is much needed in America.

It would be nice if he could be an occasional guest on Sun News, maybe on Ezra's or Brian Lilley's show.

I have heard Dave Ramsey speak before, maybe more than once, and possibly linked on SDA at some point. I may be wrong, but I think he has a syndicated radio program. However, I doubt that CBC would ever give him a slot on the radio.

Wanna bet the IRS/CRA has his number on speed dial?

Dave Ramsey is huge in the States. He does have his own show and is often visiting other shows as a guest, as his biggest area of expertise is personal finance. He gives terriffic advice in this area.

Ah ha!

The Judeo-Christian ethic strikes again. It's always good to hear others asserting what I've been saying for years! What we believe matters.

I'm reading Dinesh D'Souza's book What's So Great About Christianity. It's well worth the read because it points out what the West might look like without what Dave Ramsey calls our "Judeo-Christian ethic underpinning of telling the truth and serving."

What we believe matters. Thanks, Dave Ramsey, for being so clear about this. Thanks, Kate, for posting this.

Right on, thanks Kate for posting this..

Listened to Dave Ramsey many time on US AM stations when the ionosphere provides a good skip into to northern reaches of QC. I enjoy his "Debt Free" segment, his answer to 'how are you" -Better than I deserve- and his closing line.

communism also made some people wealthy - the plutocrats at the top of the system ripping off the wealth of everybody else - while doing NOTHING to create any wealth for anybody else. Sounds like the Democrats "apparatchiks"

NME - not so much, I found it a yawner. But I won't help you derail this thread.

The idea that service will make you richer/stronger is not found in any other religion that I have seen. Better service equals happy customers equals return customers. It's not that hard to do. The idea that caste mobility (for lack of a better phrase) should be normal is itself abnormal. The business owner who does an excellent job of serving their customers can expand, hire others, and teach them the types and level of customer service needed to be successful is not only promoting themselves (by becoming a boss) but is training their employees in "this is the way you, too, can become wealthy".

In discussions, many of those of other cultures have stated to me that there is no slavery equivalent in their culture, but they see nothing wrong with limiting some individuals for their entire lives because of who their parents were. (The untouchables are the best example of this - no matter what your capabilities, if you're an untouchable there are a great many things you just can't do.)

How Christianity has sprung from Judaism, and what rules we accept to be common, is why our system works. We don't accept merely being honest to your clan and lying to everyone else. If you want to get ahead, be seen to be equally honest to all.

Nonsense....
Another tea party knob, who thinks that Right wing capitalism will save the world.
1)You ignore the fact, that the national debt just topped $17 trillion, your paying for all that prosperity from future generations.
2)You ignore the fact that you live under a rock, have no clue how the economy works with the media constantly lying to you.
3)You ignore the fact that the system is rigged to benefit the elite, that put the system in place for them self only.
Simple facts seem to be out of your comprehension, like we live in a debt based economy. All money is debt, and is crated to benefit the corporate elite to keep us poor.
How can a place like Detroit that is bankrupt, get out of their mes. When the taxes they pay are not going back into the city, but are being sent over seas to the United Kingdom under treaty.

I agree with some of what he says, but his main premiss is wrong. He states that he believes in capitalism because he is a pragmatist and capitalism provides the best outcomes. So, if capitalism didn't providethe best outcomes he would believe in communism?

Capitalism is the best most moral system because it is the only one that is not based on coercion. If people were better off in socialist countries it would still be immoral because at it is based on coercion.

I would bet that throughout history there are many instances when slaves lived in greater comfort than free men, but they were still slaves with no autonomy.

Capitalism is right because it is economic freedom. without economic freedom any other freedom is really pointless.

C, is it not strange that until the SPLIT in the church that information became easier to be had by the "peasants", and this in turn allowed for innovation and invention to become a more staple occurance in western society. And as time and innovation progressed life became easier for peasants, thusly affording more free time and time for more experimentation, leading to more time and energy saving discoveries. Before the church split the church in conjunction with the lords rode roughshod over the peasants. Also, as life became easier, transport and travel opened more avenues, leading to more discoveries and inventions, so inspite of the previous grip the church (RCC) lorded over the populance, modernization happened and weakened the church, and lords, power over the ppl. Modernization happened inspite of the church, not because of it. Also in previous societies, Chinese, Egyptian, Mayan there were advances that had nothing to do with Christianity, so the argument that modern society, democracy and capitalism is based strictly on the foundation of the Christian belief system is in it's self a belief system and not necessarily a fact. As to your "yawn" to Dawkins book, perspective, for me he is thought prevocking

So NME finds inspiration in the scrawlings of Dawkins - why does that not surprise me. An incurious dolt inspired by the non serious writings of another incurious dolt. I guess it should come as no surprise that the explanation of atheists "It just is" attracts the incurious. However for them to extrapolate that because "It just is" when the reality is that the most prosperous, free people live in regions where Evangelical Christianity has had a real influence upon the culture is a real non sequitur. Kind of like the reason for rainbows is onions. Of course it should be noted that since the atheists amongst us deny the Second Person in the Christian Trinity, that being Thought, Knowledge, Wisdom, and Truth it should surprise no one that they spout lies, disinformation and foolishness in a nonsensical manner.

Pretty idiotic comments from Pt and Idd. Id's comment is simply mean spirited nonsense, nothing more needs to be said there.

What Pt refers to is not capitalism - it's an abominable derivative, where statism masquerades as capitalism, aka crony capitalism - where rent seekers with government connections (or campaign contributions) distort the innovation and risk/reward relationship critical to capitalism, freedom and prosperity. Then statists hypocritically blame capitalism for socialism's obvious and inevitable failures, proposing to pile failure on failure.

Silly prejudiced comments about the tea party, and breathtaking stupid ideas about the media and capitalists keeping us poor (give your head a shake, the true capitalist wants lots of affluent people to buy their products and services) add nothing to the argument and are meant to divert us to an irrelevant tangent argument. It's also clear to me the Republican party has moved away from capitalism, as have the Democrats to an even greater, and worse degree. Neither can be trusted to manage a capitalistic economy. The socialist/statist cure is always less economic and political freedom, followed inevitably by poverty. Churchill said it best - in capitalism, riches are shared unequally; in socialism, misery is shared equally.

Lenin made these idiotic arguments when he posited capitalism leads to imperialism which leads to war caused by fighting over markets, when it's clear warfare has many other features, for example the war between Islamist sects currently going on right now.

IOW Pt, your grade is an F- for inexcusable errors of omission. Lenin died in 1924, you really need to give it a rest.

"What Pt refers to is not capitalism"
Your a little confused here
Capitalism was a failure, this breaded and supported the "crony capitalism" we have today.
"stupid ideas about the media and capitalists keeping us poor"
I never said capitalists keep us poor, but a corporate elite Understanding how money is created is the 1st step out of ignorance.
All dollars are printed by a private bank and lent back to us with interest. They can never be paid back as the (interest)money hasn't even been created yet (its a ponzi scheme). Instead of how its suppose to work, with the government printing its own money interest free as it should.This system is by design made to keep us in debt, and poor. Neither party has any interest in dismantling the "crony capitalist" system.
As for Lenin he had a great idea called Communism, it was great on paper, but he ignored human greed so it failed in reality. The same can be said with capitalism.

Pt: Demonstrating a poor understanding of capitalism with a poor understanding of economics doesn't get it done. BTW there's plenty of greed and avarice within all of the ideologies and doctrines out there; witness the climate change rent warriors. Are they capitalists too?. Maybe they fit your definition; not mine. Capitalism doesn't have a "monopoly" on despotism.

Oh, and how have poor people, all over the world, under capitalism, in mixed and free economies, accelerated their prosperity, generation after generation? What an amazing feat, being so oppressed and all.

I will agree the US, if she continues her debt funded expansionary fiscal policy, will soon experience painful inflation rises resulting in much higher interest rates, probably 7-8-9% 5-year mortgages within 2-5 years (or more! - anybody remember 18% mortgages?). We'll see a similar result in Canada. Just my opinion mind you. There's no way to really time the thing, the "big correction," but it's out there and will sustain itself once it starts. Something will set that debt and correction snowball rolling.

My guess is no later than when the US is forced to renew debt at higher rates; perhaps there will be a credit downgrade. Perhaps the GOP will regain the Senate and get into legislation gridlock with the POTUS which will erode confidence and start the wave. At least that will be a possibly good sign, somebody presumably will want to turn off the debt taps.

It will happen - soon, likely during the Obama administration - then they can blame the racists - coming soon to an economy near you!

There is a some negative, short term economic trigger event/catalyst out there, it will surely come - sooner rather than later. When it does, negative economic sentiment will flood the market, triggering another serious recession and correction in equity, bond (of course), and realty markets in Canada, US and elsewhere; but, I think not a depression. I personally think that process is already underway, with the second, really big wave of boomers now at or approaching 60. Maybe they'll do a Greece and capsize. I still think the Americans are better than that and, though scorched and scathed, will survive albeit with a lower standard of living, nevertheless left with a sustainable economy. We shall see, sooner rather than later I think.

The Canadian experience doesn't promise to be a lot better, despite our superior economic leadership. We're now spreading our trade eggs around and that is a real smart move.

I still say the Obama administration is a poor example of capitalism at work, oppressive or otherwise. Try Canada, or maybe Switzerland - you'll get a better idea. BTW, in truly capitalist societies, the middle class runs the show anyway - when they're not busy at Timmies, not thinking about politics and economics. They don't seem oppressed to me.