- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 4,207
- Reaction score
- 2,615
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Resources are finite but currency is not. Currency/money that most people race for is printed and can be printed infinitely.
What to do about this flaw is what I am getting at?
Wealth and success are laudable when they're earned in an honest way. If they're earned at the expense of someone else, or at the expense of the environment, then they're not so laudable at all.
Likewise, there's no pat on the back deserved for someone who merely inherited their wealth. Generational wealth does nothing to help society and, as a matter of fact, it can be quite destructive.
I think people who demand the rich pay more are just jealous of what they achieved. I dont mind the wealth gap at all, I dont see anything wrong with it because it rewards those who work hard and are lucky as opposed to lazy people who just want something for nothing.
a government that would take every penny someone has past a certain amount should be overthrown
A billionaire has more power and control than a millionaire, who in turn has more power and control than the rest of us...
There's not a limit on wealth. At any given time X amount of wealth exists. X is a finite number.
If you want to talk a wealth gap watch this video on America's disappearing middle class by Bill Maher.
Very wrong. Im fully aware that its not a free market and never has been. What I am totally against is government taking money away from its citizens because that is what taxes are- stolen money and stolen by the government under threat of force.You are falling for the 'vulgar libertarian' trap Kevin Carson always warns about. You assume that all wealth that is acquired is earned in a completely free, open, and voluntary market system. We have no such system.
Very wrong. Im fully aware that its not a free market and never has been.
Look, Im all for a free market but this is what we have right now. And the alternative, which is to tax the hell out of the rich to give to the poor is something I am totally against.Then why are you defending the market we have and what results from it?
Look, Im all for a free market but this is what we have right now.
And the alternative, which is to tax the hell out of the rich to give to the poor is something I am totally against.
The other wealth gap
"From an economic perspective, the most dramatic wealth gap is between middling millionaires, who have seen only modest gains, and the booming billionaires, who now seem to defy economic gravity. It's between the guy making $300,000, who still feels poor, and the man who made $37 million a day for a year. Both are lumped together by politicians, the media and even economists as "the rich" or "the 1 percent," who are gaining at the expense of everyone else.
The big winners are those in the top 0.01 percent. These folks, who have a net worth of more than $100 million. How are they doing it? The top 0.01 percent are stock-market winners—CEOs, bankers, entrepreneurs—who are riding financial markets to outsize gains. The rest of the top 1 percent are often mere wage earners."
Does this matter in your opinion of who's really "leveraging" the system in their favor?
I'm not getting into whether.. it's fair or not.. to be able to use your incredible wealth ($1 billion+) to manipulate markets, but rather> do you see a difference in the gaps?
The fewer avenues the average joe has to be a part of the decision making for his society that he finds the more likely he is to become radicalized. This is a pattern continually repeated throughout society.
I don't care if it's fair or not and it probably is. It's just dangerous and destabilizing. Nobody wins in this environment in the long run, not even the rich guys.
This is the basis if my opposition. I don't have to have to live through revolution, riots, etcetera. We can debate the morality of it until the cows come home, but the fact is human nature won't change and hasn't changed and the cycle tends to repeat itself.
This is an astute comparison of what has, historically, happened in the past. The wealthy, elite, controlling class, ultimately, measure everything by factors, not involving the human value as the highest. If we are to have a simple metric by which to govern society, it's thru our laws, values, ethics and traditional standards that equate into rights. These notions are being changed and subverted, so that the boundary lines are being moved to suit those whom have special interests.
There will probably be an eventual series of financial catastrophe's- coinciding with global conflicts that lead to large swaths of societal dysfunction and contraction. Meaning the evolution of the species, even though the crap will hit the fan.
There are multiple themes which can signal the downfall of a society and wealth disparity is one of them. Some others can include too large a military, over sophistication and expense of societal systems, and a loss if a sense of community. This country is rife with all that.
We are slashing and burning our culture for profit, essentially.
But I agree you may be right. The stakes are global this time and consequences are unforeseen.
If you listen to the arguments of the conservatives and liberals here. They each see a piece of the whole but are too busy infighting to fix it and pull us back from the brink
Look, Im all for a free market but this is what we have right now. And the alternative, which is to tax the hell out of the rich to give to the poor is something I am totally against.
Thought you were from Dallas?
Also, what do you propose it should be done with the aristocrats?
I don't think anybody is "too wealthy" however I'm beginning to think my preferred economic model is capitalism but where all employes are also allowed to become stock holders over time as the company expands.
Nobody should be allowed to have a billion dollars. We need an upper-upper tax bracket of 100%.
What's your point?
I see a trending problem that has not existed before and that's the intentional growth of the global population, to increase the world economies size and profitability. The 'powers that be' have purposely built our current economies on a growth formula that is unsustainable, because of natural resources and structural problems supplying the needs of the many.
And you are right that the two or mulitple distinguishing ideologies (parties) are blinded to this reality, thinking they can fight for what's left of the pie, without facing the overall ramifications that the whole system is in danger.
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?