Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[ilia25]

No one has benefitted more from capitalism more than poor people. Their quality of life is a million times better than it used to be.

Bullshit. In the past 30 years the poor saw their incomes stagnating, while the incomes of 1% had increased hundreds percents.

 

[Geaux4it]

 

[georgephillip]

capitalism is the only system that works. End of story. WE can regulate and demand a minimum wage but pure socialism doesn't work as it is only a output.

YOU NEED INPUT. capitalism is that input...

You can't better society without input. Understand?

Your still haven't defined "input" and "output."

 

[gipper]

When America was a truly free market capitalist nation, it generated the largest middle class and the greatest generation of wealth ever seen in all of world history.

Then...things changed decades ago when America turned away from capitalism and followed the path of collectivism...which has resulted in drops in income and wealth for most Americans, to say nothing of lost liberty. Yet, there are those who condemn capitalism for this decline, when in fact, the decline is the result of the opposite of capitalism.

 

[Stephanie]

Little georgie is the Bagdad Bob for Socialist/Communist

Inequality=the new meme for pushing Socialism/communism on you

people better wake up in this country

 

[georgephillip]

Capitalism requires people to aim high, educate themselves and participate to get somewhere. It would work far better if government hadn't allowed certain wealthy donors to take over running the country. Capitalism needs fair rules that are upheld. It's government, not the private sector, that messed that up. No politician has ever bitten the hand that feeds them and that means always obeying the real 1%, which is not corporations, but the Federal Reserve. We are all slaves to them. We need to abolish the Federal Reserve.

Socialism requires people to merely exist and everyone gets the basics to survive. The basics decrease as the wealth creation decreases over time. Then you have communism.

At least capitalism helps a country grow and if people are lazy, they go no where. And I mean real capitalism, not crony capitalism that we have now, thanks to government. Socialism is unsustainable. I'd rather have the ability to grow and succeed than be trapped in world where limits are placed on every aspect of our lives.

Why do you blame government for crony capitalism when it's capitalism the creates the private fortunes that corrupt government? Every government yet devised has served its richest citizens at the expense of its majority; no economic system ever devised creates a few massive private fortunes as effectively as capitalism does.

Why is government responsible for their expenditures, specifically the expenditures which removes major liabilities, from major donors who fund their campaigns?

Are you being serious or playing the fool here?

I ask because government is taking an action, therefore government is responsible for that action. This isn't even a debatable point. Yet your query makes it appear that you're oblivious of this very simple and otherwise incontrovertible point.

Beyond that, Crony Capitalism is a term born from the Left designed to separate themselves from their responsibility for DOING IT! It's the axiomatic result of Progressivism, which is a name the same group came up with to avoid being known as fascist. Fascism is a term which the Left hi-jacked to keep from knowing that they're socialists.

Socialism rests upon Relativism.

Relativism rejects objectivity.

Objectivity is essential to truth, trust, justice and morality.

As a result of their inability to be objective, its adherence, being incapable of recognizing truth, they're incapable of living moral lives, and where power is added to their equation, they're incapable of serving justice.

And THAT is why your government is corrupt. The people comprising the government are corrupt. And they're corrupt because they have bought into deceitful ideas, which are built upon fraudulence, designed to influence people just like them, ignorant people looking for an easier way.

Socialism is a lie. It promises what doesn't exist, to foolish people who need it to exist, because they can't face the effort required to do the right thing. 'Cause it's HARD!

I'm not sure I understand the points you're trying to make here.
Let's take it from the top.

When you say: "Why is government responsible for their expenditures, specifically the expenditures which removes major liabilities from major donors who fund their campaigns?

Are you asking who benefits from those major donations?

I would answer that question by saying the richest 1% of citizens benefit just as they have in every government yet devised, and very few of that 1% of citizens are on the Left.

 

[georgephillip]

Mr Dingle Berry, Sir.

That bullshit.

Congress decided to regulate the economy - WITHOUT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY - in order to grandstand for the masses and industries who were ineffective.

Read about the STANDARD OIL OF NEW JERSEY CASE. ESSO didn't pay the fuckers to be regulated.

.

Which one percent of US voters paid congress to regulate the economy without constitutional authority? IMHO, the problem begins with vast private fortunes that are able to buy the congress, courts, and white house.

WHO the fuck paid Congress to regulate ESSO?

WHO paid congress to regulate credit and banking with the creation of the Federal Reserve Board?

.

I'm not sure about Exxon; however, IMHO your second query isn't too hard to answer:
Nelson Aldrich
JP Morgan
John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
Frank A. Vanderlip
Henry Davison
Charles D. Norton
Colonel Edward House
Paul Warburg

In short, the one percent of its day paid congress to regulate credit and banking with the creation of the Fed.

 

[kaz]

Capitalism is supposed to provide everyone the opportunity to benefit from our country's productivity

Not only does capitalism work in that regard, but it's the only system that works. Your blind support of socialism only allows those chosen by government to succeed, and the rulers of government always chose themselves first.

You are confusing "opportunity" with "results." There are some butt lazy people out there, Virginia, who don't take advantage of the endless opportunities they have. They just whine and point their greedy fingers and say, "I want." You know, like you and most of the other leftists on this site. Anyone who can't succeed in this country, even still with what you and Obama have done to it, is a Loser with a capital "L."

 

[gipper]

Thomas Sowell nails it....

Empirical studies that follow income brackets over time repeatedly reach opposite conclusions from studies that follow individuals. But people in the media, in politics and even in academia, cite statistics about income brackets as if they are discussing what happens to actual human beings over time.

All too often when liberals cite statistics, they forget the statisticians' warning that correlation is not causation.

For example the New York Times crusaded for government-provided prenatal care, citing the fact that black mothers had prenatal care less often than white mothers -- and that there were higher rates of infant mortality among blacks.

But was correlation causation? American women of Chinese, Japanese and Filipino ancestry also had less prenatal care than whites -- and lower rates of infant mortality than either blacks or whites.

When statistics showed that black applicants for conventional mortgage loans were turned down at twice the rate for white applicants, the media went ballistic crying racial discrimination. But whites were turned down almost twice as often as Asian Americans -- and no one thinks that is racial discrimination.

Facts are not liberals' strong suit. Rhetoric is.

 

[Redfish]

The basic goal of the board game Monopoly is to accumulate as much money and property as you can. The game is over when one person ends up with all the money and property and everyone else in the game is "poor." It seems that capitalism and Monopoly have the same goal.

Oh, you poor little victim, the evil rich are holding you down. Grow the fuck up and make your own life, WE and the govt don't owe you shit.

When you speak of growing "the fuck up," look to yourself. If you had a brain and the ability to use it you would have noted I asked for NOTHING. I merely pointed out that capitalism and Monopoly have the same goal. That goal is to accumulate as much money as possible leaving everyone else with no money (poor).

Monopoly is a game. Capitalism is the most successful economic system in the history of the world. Under freedom and capitalism the USA became the greatest nation in the history of the world. Everyone is better of because of it.

Yes, when people are free some will succeed more than others---------thats life, deal with it.

 

[editec]

When America was a truly free market capitalist nation, it generated the largest middle class and the greatest generation of wealth ever seen in all of world history.

WRONGO, lad. Read your nation's history.

Then...things changed decades ago when America turned away from capitalism and followed the path of collectivism...which has resulted in drops in income and wealth for most Americans, to say nothing of lost liberty. Yet, there are those who condemn capitalism for this decline, when in fact, the decline is the result of the opposite of capitalism.

the rise of the working class into a MIDDLE CLASS was the result of UNIONISM.

Unionism is that collectivism that you so fear, lad.

Open a book, kid.

Educate yourself.


MACROEconomic is way more complex that the comic book version you seem to buy into.

 

[gipper]

When America was a truly free market capitalist nation, it generated the largest middle class and the greatest generation of wealth ever seen in all of world history.

WRONGO, lad. Read your nation's history.

Then...things changed decades ago when America turned away from capitalism and followed the path of collectivism...which has resulted in drops in income and wealth for most Americans, to say nothing of lost liberty. Yet, there are those who condemn capitalism for this decline, when in fact, the decline is the result of the opposite of capitalism.

the rise of the working class into a MIDDLE CLASS was the result of UNIONISM.

Unionism is that collectivism that you so fear, lad.

Open a book, kid.

Educate yourself.


MACROEconomic is way more complex that the comic book version you seem to buy into.

The fault lies with the very institution you so love and desire that it continues to grow in size and power...the very thing that will destroy America. Why do you want to destroy America?

Please read this and try to comprehend....

The American middle class is fast disappearing, not because there is anything particularly wrong with the people involved – they are every bit as talented as their parents and grandparents were – but because the ruling class of the United States has pushed them into this position.

This middle class was once composed of proud and productive people… the kind who now exist primarily in advertisements for trucks. These people and their abilities remain, but Washington has taken power over nearly every choice they have and thinks of them only for the purposes of voting, fighting in wars, and creating more debt (aka buying stuff they don’t need).

These people are at a crossroads, facing fundamental choices about who they are and what they will be. The big threat in front of them is that by not stopping, thinking, and choosing (and it’s always easier to do nothing), they’ll stay on the path that has been grinding them into the dirt.
The Death (and Rebirth) of the American Middle Class

 

[bripat9643]

Socialism guarantees equality. Everybody is poor with the exception of the socialists who run the system. Didn't Stalin teach you low information lefties anything?

Enough to know Stalin did everything he could to discourage socialism in practice:

"When the world's two great propaganda systems agree on some doctrine, it requires some intellectual effort to escape its shackles.

"One such doctrine is that the society created by Lenin and Trotsky and molded further by Stalin and his successors has some relation to socialism in some meaningful or historically accurate sense of this concept.

"In fact, if there is a relation, it is the relation of contradiction.

"It is clear enough why both major propaganda systems insist upon this fantasy.

"Since its origins, the Soviet State has attempted to harness the energies of its own population and oppressed people elsewhere in the service of the men who took advantage of the popular ferment in Russia in 1917 to seize State power.

"One major ideological weapon employed to this end has been the claim that the State managers are leading their own society and the world towards the socialist ideal; an impossibility, as any socialist -- surely any serious Marxist -- should have understood at once (many did), and a lie of mammoth proportions as history has revealed since the earliest days of the Bolshevik regime.

"The taskmasters have attempted to gain legitimacy and support by exploiting the aura of socialist ideals and the respect that is rightly accorded them, to conceal their own ritual practice as they destroyed every vestige of socialism."

The Soviet Union Versus Socialism, by Noam Chomsky

When you start quoting Noam Chomsky, you lose all credibility. Noam defended the Khmer Rouge slaughter of 3 million Cambodians.

Where's the evidence that the Soviet Union wasn't socialist? You certainly didn't post any.

 

[bripat9643]

And some of the most "successful" among you are greedy beyond belief:

"2. The Richest 400 Took $300 Billion in 2013, Approximately the ENTIRE Safety Net

The total budget for SNAP, WIC (Women, Infants, children), Child Nutrition, Earned Income Tax Credit, Supplemental Security Income, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and Housing is less than the $300 billion 'earned' by the Forbes 400."

Another Shocking Wealth Grab by the Rich -- In Just One Year | Common Dreams

Capitalists get rich by impoverishing millions of workers.

HOW exactly do you figure that the wealth of the rich capitalists has deprived the poor of anything?

Your zero sum game gag is stale and has always been dishonest.

In reality, the very poorest in our country are vastly more wealthy than the poor folks of years gone by.

The wealth of Gates (even before he started giving vast amounts of it away) NEVER deprived anybody of anything. Indeed, BECAUSE of him and the work he did (and the work of others whose contributions he utilized) TONS of people got great jobs and their increased disposable income led to other people deriving lots of economic benefits, too.

A rising tide lifts all boats. That Gates got fabulously wealthy didn't cause any poor person to lose anything.

Your thesis is predicated entirely on dishonesty, Georgie.

Your corporate butt-sniffing doesn't even quality as a thesis, Greedy.

"Conclusion: The System Is Broken

The overall calculations reveal that, to the best approximation:

--The richest 400 individuals made an average of $750,000,000 each in 2013.
--The .01% (12,000 families) made about $40,000,000 each.
--The .1% (120,000 families) made about $3,600,000 each.
--The rest of the 1% (1,068,000 families) made over $830,000 each.
--The 2-5% (4,800,000 households) made about $300,000 each.
--The 6-10% (6,000,000 households) made about $95,000 each.
--The 11-20% (12,000,000 households) made about $39,000 each.
--The 21-40% (24,000,000 households) made about $13,000 each.
--The 41-60% (24,000,000 households) made about $4,000 each.
--The 61-80% (24,000,000 households) made about $333 each.
--The bottom 20% (24,000,000 households) made nothing.

Capitalism is supposed to provide everyone the opportunity to benefit from our country's productivity.

"But it hasn't worked that way for the past 35 years.

"Today only the people who already have money can increase their wealth.

"Congress doesn't seem to recognize, or doesn't care, that the system is horribly distorted in favor of a small group of people who need to do very little to take most of the wealth."

Another Shocking Wealth Grab by the Rich -- In Just One Year | Common Dreams

the figures you are quoting are for the entire world, a large percentage of which is not capitalist. Yet, you go on to refer to the capitalism in the United States. That makes anything based on that bullshit.

 

[bripat9643]

Your link:

"That being said, this chart really does put things into perspective. While we take for granted the simple things in life, nearly 1 billion people throughout the globe are currently struggling to survive on less than $1.25 a day. While it's great to get involved and donate your time, talents, and resources to local charities, what's really going to help these families is economic liberty."

Capitalism and the governments it controls are consigning more individuals to poverty today than at any time in its history:

"The figures depicting poverty and hardship are many and varied. Over 20 per cent of the world’s population (that is 1.4 billion people) live on less than 1.25 dollars a day, 75 cents below the official World Bank poverty threshold.

"UNICEF states that 22,000 children (under the age of five; if it was six or seven the numbers would be even higher) die every day due to poverty-related issues.

"Of the two billion children in the world, half are currently living their lives in extreme poverty, with limited or no access to clean water or sanitation, healthcare and education worth the name.

"The greatest concentrations of people living below the 2-dollars-per-day poverty line are to be found in rural areas, where three in every four of those below the poverty line are to be found. Life is little better in the cities, where over half the world’s 7.2 billion population now live, one in three of whom are living in a slum."

Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality

This chart shows that the number of people living on $1.25 or less has been decreasing drastically thanks to capitalism.

Do you have any figures for the last six years?

Do you imagine they returned to 1981 levels in the last 6 years? Not a chance. Most of the improvement occurred in China, and its economy is still booming.

 

[bripat9643]

Why do you blame government for crony capitalism when it's capitalism the creates the private fortunes that corrupt government? Every government yet devised has served its richest citizens at the expense of its majority; no economic system ever devised creates a few massive private fortunes as effectively as capitalism does.

Mr Dingle Berry, Sir.

That bullshit.

Congress decided to regulate the economy - WITHOUT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY - in order to grandstand for the masses and industries who were ineffective.

Read about the STANDARD OIL OF NEW JERSEY CASE. ESSO didn't pay the fuckers to be regulated.

.

Which one percent of US voters paid congress to regulate the economy without constitutional authority? IMHO, the problem begins with vast private fortunes that are able to buy the congress, courts, and white house.

It was the 99% who gave Congress that authority.

 

[bripat9643]

No one has benefitted more from capitalism more than poor people. Their quality of life is a million times better than it used to be.

Bullshit. In the past 30 years the poor saw their incomes stagnating, while the incomes of 1% had increased hundreds percents.

That's family income, numskull. Families have been shrinking because of all the welfare queens who can't keep their legs together and have illegitimate children. One sure way to grow up poor is for your mother to have never been married to your father.

Don't blame capitalism for that. Blame the welfare state.

 

[bripat9643]

Little georgie is the Bagdad Bob for Socialist/Communist

Inequality=the new meme for pushing Socialism/communism on you

people better wake up in this country

Yep, the "inequality" meme is a con designed to separate you from your money.

 

[bripat9643]

When America was a truly free market capitalist nation, it generated the largest middle class and the greatest generation of wealth ever seen in all of world history.

WRONGO, lad. Read your nation's history.

Then...things changed decades ago when America turned away from capitalism and followed the path of collectivism...which has resulted in drops in income and wealth for most Americans, to say nothing of lost liberty. Yet, there are those who condemn capitalism for this decline, when in fact, the decline is the result of the opposite of capitalism.

the rise of the working class into a MIDDLE CLASS was the result of UNIONISM.

Dead wrong. Unions don't increase worker productivity one iota. So how do they increase our standard of living?

 

[racewright]

Outcome is up to those who work the hardest, plain and simple.
Should we tell Seattle how many touchdowns the can score on Feb 2nd or maybe also tell Denver to not run up the score (cause that's what's going to happen) lolololo

No why would you want equality in one area and not in all---Because of race that's why--if you wish I will explain further.