- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
If a little bit taking from the top creates more wealth for everyone (and more total wealth for society as a whole), then its a good thing
of course-stealing from some to slake the envy of others is the liberal mantra but all that does is make rich dem politicians richer because people like you will worship them and give them votes for doing that
giving the slothful and unproductive money they didn't earn tends to cause them to vote for those who give them handouts but really doesn't motivate them to become productive
In fact it often deters that
Its not about envy, its about how to make society be as functional, wealthy, and as efficient as possible, given the constraints of human nature.
This is a question of engineering more than it is about anything else.
well the last 50 years has been marked with massive income redistribution and it sure hasn't done much good
SYL
There is nothing wrong with corporations, but there is something very wrong with a lack of social responsibility.
in my opinion, the 99 percenters are concerned about this disparity and that it is widening since the financial meltdown:
View attachment 67116490
..........
...A woman dying of breast cancer has been denied the only treatment which could prolong her life because the NHS deems it too expensive....
"Lack of social responsibility" according to whom?
How much do major U.S. corporations donate to charity, Mega? Most people don't even know the number. I've looked up some stats, and it's pretty impressive. Example...Pfizer (in 2004) gave 21% of its income to charity; they have programs specially designed for people who can't afford to pay for their medicine; they employ 110,000 people; and, at least here in the US, I think it's safe to assume these are damn good jobs. WalMart, in 2010, announced plans to donate $250 million in cash and $1.75 billion worth of food over the next five years to fight hunger in the United States. In 2009 113 companies donated cash totalling over $4.9 billion. Goldman Sachs increased its giving by 353% in 2010, to $315.4 million; other financials followed suit as their profits began to rebound. Citigroup -- $100 million in cash. Pfizer topped the list in 2010, giving more than $3 billion in cash and products (and, btw,l Pfizer is the largest researcher of medicines on planet earth); Oracle $2.3 billion; Merck $1.2 billion; Wells Fargo $219-million; and these numbers I'm throwing out are just the tip of the iceburg.
Big Businesses Won
Big bad WalMart has brought affordable goods to rural areas that were being gouged by local shopkeepers. For years, Chicago politicians blocked WalMart's store on the south side in support of unions who were determined to bring WalMart employees into their fold. This is an area where people have to drive 15-20 miles for a chain store and affordable prices. And fresh produce. Yes, in Chicago. The community clamored for the store....for the 400 jobs...for the cost-savings WalMart would allow And finally the community won.
Do the CEOs of these companies make a lot of money? Yeppers. But if the guy who heads the largest medicinal research company in the world isn't worth $13.7 million (in '09), then tell me how A Rod is worth $27.5 million; Tiger Woods $110 million; in 2004, Payton Manning received the largest signing bonus in sports history: $34.5 million; his yearly income for ten years? $42 million.
Maybe these demonstrators should be at playing fields protesting those salaries.
Capitalism is a wonderful thing...
"Lack of social responsibility" according to whom?
How much do major U.S. corporations donate to charity, Mega? Most people don't even know the number. I've looked up some stats, and it's pretty impressive. Example...Pfizer (in 2004) gave 21% of its income to charity; they have programs specially designed for people who can't afford to pay for their medicine; they employ 110,000 people; and, at least here in the US, I think it's safe to assume these are damn good jobs. WalMart, in 2010, announced plans to donate $250 million in cash and $1.75 billion worth of food over the next five years to fight hunger in the United States. In 2009 113 companies donated cash totalling over $4.9 billion. Goldman Sachs increased its giving by 353% in 2010, to $315.4 million; other financials followed suit as their profits began to rebound. Citigroup -- $100 million in cash. Pfizer topped the list in 2010, giving more than $3 billion in cash and products (and, btw,l Pfizer is the largest researcher of medicines on planet earth); Oracle $2.3 billion; Merck $1.2 billion; Wells Fargo $219-million; and these numbers I'm throwing out are just the tip of the iceburg.
Big Businesses Won
Big bad WalMart has brought affordable goods to rural areas that were being gouged by local shopkeepers. For years, Chicago politicians blocked WalMart's store on the south side in support of unions who were determined to bring WalMart employees into their fold. This is an area where people have to drive 15-20 miles for a chain store and affordable prices. And fresh produce. Yes, in Chicago. The community clamored for the store....for the 400 jobs...for the cost-savings WalMart would allow And finally the community won.
Do the CEOs of these companies make a lot of money? Yeppers. But if the guy who heads the largest medicinal research company in the world isn't worth $13.7 million (in '09), then tell me how A Rod is worth $27.5 million; Tiger Woods $110 million; in 2004, Payton Manning received the largest signing bonus in sports history: $34.5 million; his yearly income for ten years? $42 million.
Maybe these demonstrators should be at playing fields protesting those salaries.
Capitalism is a wonderful thing...
Its not about envy, its about how to make society be as functional, wealthy, and as efficient as possible, given the constraints of human nature.
This is a question of engineering more than it is about anything else.
Any good engineer will compensate for flawed materials if that is what they have to work with. One can complaint that x steel is not as good as y steel, but if x steel is what they got, they find a way to make it work. Human nature is flawed, so we must account for it and build a system that works within those flaws.
"Lack of social responsibility" according to whom?
How much do major U.S. corporations donate to charity, Mega? Most people don't even know the number. I've looked up some stats, and it's pretty impressive. Example...Pfizer (in 2004) gave 21% of its income to charity; they have programs specially designed for people who can't afford to pay for their medicine; they employ 110,000 people; and, at least here in the US, I think it's safe to assume these are damn good jobs. WalMart, in 2010, announced plans to donate $250 million in cash and $1.75 billion worth of food over the next five years to fight hunger in the United States. In 2009 113 companies donated cash totalling over $4.9 billion. Goldman Sachs increased its giving by 353% in 2010, to $315.4 million; other financials followed suit as their profits began to rebound. Citigroup -- $100 million in cash. Pfizer topped the list in 2010, giving more than $3 billion in cash and products (and, btw,l Pfizer is the largest researcher of medicines on planet earth); Oracle $2.3 billion; Merck $1.2 billion; Wells Fargo $219-million; and these numbers I'm throwing out are just the tip of the iceburg.
Big Businesses Won
Big bad WalMart has brought affordable goods to rural areas that were being gouged by local shopkeepers. For years, Chicago politicians blocked WalMart's store on the south side in support of unions who were determined to bring WalMart employees into their fold. This is an area where people have to drive 15-20 miles for a chain store and affordable prices. And fresh produce. Yes, in Chicago. The community clamored for the store....for the 400 jobs...for the cost-savings WalMart would allow And finally the community won.
Do the CEOs of these companies make a lot of money? Yeppers. But if the guy who heads the largest medicinal research company in the world isn't worth $13.7 million (in '09), then tell me how A Rod is worth $27.5 million; Tiger Woods $110 million; in 2004, Payton Manning received the largest signing bonus in sports history: $34.5 million; his yearly income for ten years? $42 million.
Maybe these demonstrators should be at playing fields protesting those salaries.
Capitalism is a wonderful thing...
And that certainly helps, but when people are opposing the very infrastructure that makes this country great, such as public schooling, our retirement system, necessary changes to our health system, and other things that allow people to focus on what makes them successful as opposed to just getting by day to day, they are not performing their responsibilities.
i know i've told you this before.... but you? you. are awesome.
of course-stealing from some to slake the envy of others is the liberal mantra but all that does is make rich dem politicians richer because people like you will worship them and give them votes for doing that
giving the slothful and unproductive money they didn't earn tends to cause them to vote for those who give them handouts but really doesn't motivate them to become productive
In fact it often deters that
And that certainly helps, but when people are opposing the very infrastructure that makes this country great, such as public schooling, our retirement system, necessary changes to our health system, and other things that allow people to focus on what makes them successful as opposed to just getting by day to day, they are not performing their responsibilities.
:lamo Congratulations, guys. You could not have picked a more inchoate, idiot group of hippies to tie your public image too. Half these people want to destroy your jobs... but you can't help yourself, and rush to join in with anyone yelling about the rich.
alternate headline for this story: Unions Jump Shark.
Why are Republicans rushing to defend the beneficiaries of big government?
Why are the Republicans rushing to defend those who have been insulated from their failures in the market?
The typical Republican response to this protest demonstrates that they do not understand the nature of big government or free markets.
WHat does that even mean "the 99% have been left out"? You do realize I am certain that a good number of that '99%' are pretty damn wealthy...making millions. Another very healthy chunk of that '99%' makes well over 250k. A significant portion of that '99%' make 50k or better. Lord...toss people a slogan and they will jump on that beeeyotch like its steak. Left out? Then maybe you ought to look at yourself and YOUR role.
Its not about envy, its about how to make society be as functional, wealthy, and as efficient as possible, given the constraints of human nature.
This is a question of engineering more than it is about anything else.
Any good engineer will compensate for flawed materials if that is what they have to work with. One can complaint that x steel is not as good as y steel, but if x steel is what they got, they find a way to make it work. Human nature is flawed, so we must account for it and build a system that works within those flaws.
Why are Republicans rushing to defend the beneficiaries of big government? Why are the Republicans rushing to defend those who have been insulated from their failures in the market?
The typical Republican response to this protest demonstrates that they do not understand the nature of big government or free markets.
That is NOT the part of the message that Republicans take issue with. Many Republicans and Libertarians were opposed to all bail-outs, all concepts of "too big to fail". Many of us have it as a basic tenant of capitalism that failure must be allowed to happen with no impediment, so that something better will take its place. As we saw with Stimulus, three yeras of UI, and any number of other liberal boondoggles, to include throwing good money after bad with green energy, it is the liberal dogma to subsidize failure. Just so long as it secures votes.
I was one Conservative who held my nose and supported TARP. It worked, and almost all that money has been paid back. But I would have been fine with letting all things fail, to include such as GM, and keeping UI at one year max.
The bottom line with these parasites on Wall Street and elsewhere, besides being pure astro-turf, is that they are for redistribution of wealth. Just so long as they are on the receiving end. They want free stuff.
So really, while you support failure, you really don't. I was against TARP from day one. To say it's all been paid back is spin. Freddie and Fannie was a part of TARP and we are going to lose who knows, billions upon billions? Trillions?
Bush signed the bill to subsidize the bank failure. McCain supported it. If he had won he would have blown the money all the same.
So really, while you support failure, you really don't. I was against TARP from day one. To say it's all been paid back is spin. Freddie and Fannie was a part of TARP and we are going to lose who knows, billions upon billions? Trillions?
that's correct - they are currently camping out in the street somewhere.
so let's see if we have this right:
thus far, you have accused me of making stuff up, so I cited NPR. then you offered that i could be lying, but it was linked. Then you argued that we were linking right wing sites to give off left-wing talking points, so maybe those sites were making things up. Then it turned out that the site linked was a left wing site which had put up the Statement of Facts because they were excited about and supported the OWS protests...
your continued attempts to deny that they released this are getting bizzare. as it is precisely the kind of mumbo-jumbo that you'd expect out of these crowds, i'll admit I'm confused as to why you persist.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?