Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

Cut the crap. Human beings/human activity creates inequality. Some are smarter than others. Some work harder than others. Some make better choices. Some are selfish. Some are greedy. Some are lazy. Some are stupid. Some are lucky...some not. Inequality is. That is why the nuns told me to concentrate on saving my soul...so as to be happy with God in heaven...and not to fret over who has what. Pax vobiscum.
Which only works if god and heaven exist.
Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised. Solutions include stronger regulation of markets to promote sustainable and equitable growth along with curbing the power of the rich to influence political processes and policies that best suit their interests. Build a wall of separation between private wealth and the state, or use the state to tax private wealth into extinction. There are alternatives.

Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised.

Inequality exists because people are not equal.
 
Breaking for GOP VOTERS- The bottom fifth pays 16 per cent in ALL taxes and fees, the rest pays 21 per cent, and the richest AT LEAST triple their wealth while everyone else and the country goes to hell under Reaganist/Voodoo tax rates...

Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Breaking for GOP VOTERS- The bottom fifth pays 16 per cent in ALL taxes and fees, the rest pays 21 per cent

And those pesky rich people pay even more.
 
Preferably a totalitarian communist whose identity profile includes that of a person of color, homosexual, aged, female, overweight, midget....REPRESENT Lol
 
Why blame the business that buys government and give the government guys a pass?

Exactly; the liberal logic -

If I offer you money, and you take it, the blame for you taking it lies on me for having offered.

Unreal...

:cuckoo:
 
Seeing how much of modern technology wouldn't exist if not for capitalism and freedom of thought. I'll just have to say that life would be utter hell without capitalism.

When has pure socialism been successful? The human economy works like a engine...You need input and out put. Socialism is only good at output....
How are you defining "input" and "output"?
Modern technology stems from human labor and much of the research that has made it possible comes from public and not private capital.

Try telling that to those creative entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs.
Steve's not taking any calls, but he would probably be among the first to credit public funding of the internet to explain much of his $ucce$$.
 
Cut the crap. Human beings/human activity creates inequality. Some are smarter than others. Some work harder than others. Some make better choices. Some are selfish. Some are greedy. Some are lazy. Some are stupid. Some are lucky...some not. Inequality is. That is why the nuns told me to concentrate on saving my soul...so as to be happy with God in heaven...and not to fret over who has what. Pax vobiscum.

Bump
 
Cut the crap. Human beings/human activity creates inequality. Some are smarter than others. Some work harder than others. Some make better choices. Some are selfish. Some are greedy. Some are lazy. Some are stupid. Some are lucky...some not. Inequality is. That is why the nuns told me to concentrate on saving my soul...so as to be happy with God in heaven...and not to fret over who has what. Pax vobiscum.
Which only works if god and heaven exist.
Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised. Solutions include stronger regulation of markets to promote sustainable and equitable growth along with curbing the power of the rich to influence political processes and policies that best suit their interests. Build a wall of separation between private wealth and the state, or use the state to tax private wealth into extinction. There are alternatives.

Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised.

Inequality exists because people are not equal.
"The 85 richest people on Earth now have the same amount of wealth as the bottom half of the global population, according to a report released Monday by the British humanitarian group Oxfam International."

They're not that unequal.

Oxfam report highlights widening income gap between rich, poor - latimes.com
 
I am not pro or anti government. I find such a political dynamic juvenile and based on ideology more so than economics and reality. I am for effective markets and I am for a pro growth approach based on demand and supply growing hand in hand. If government involvement is needed then so be it.

In what circumstances is government needed?

.

There are two major justifications for government involvement. Efficiency and Morality. I will start with just some of the efficiency reasons.

When foreign governments are involved. When markets become too inelastic. When there is a contraction in the effective supply of money. When there is a temporary correction happening with regards to demand. When it is difficult to monetize the benefit (This applies to things like infrastructure and education). Safety. Health.

From a moral standpoint I think the government can justify things like healthcare but there is also an efficiency component to healthcare. Especially for the youth and the workers. I consider disability benefits to be a moral stance.

I also think that the best help that can be provided to the poor is a better wage. This is a battle of perception as much as reality.

You want government involved for "morality"?!? Bwahahahahahahahhahah!!!! Yeah - Obama and our government are soooo "moral".

:lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol:
 
Last edited:
I will take you more seriously when you take yourself more seriously.

I am ok with you barking away. Your name is fitting.

You can't be more than 12 junior. You can't defend your position. You can't articulate what is wrong with someone else's position. And you think the federal government is "moral"...

Aren't kids cute? They say the darndest things!
 
Which only works if god and heaven exist.
Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised. Solutions include stronger regulation of markets to promote sustainable and equitable growth along with curbing the power of the rich to influence political processes and policies that best suit their interests. Build a wall of separation between private wealth and the state, or use the state to tax private wealth into extinction. There are alternatives.

Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised.

Inequality exists because people are not equal.
"The 85 richest people on Earth now have the same amount of wealth as the bottom half of the global population, according to a report released Monday by the British humanitarian group Oxfam International."

They're not that unequal.

Oxfam report highlights widening income gap between rich, poor - latimes.com

And if god and heaven don't exist what incentive is there to be virtuous...especially if you are comfortable?
 
I am not pro or anti government. I find such a political dynamic juvenile and based on ideology more so than economics and reality. I am for effective markets and I am for a pro growth approach based on demand and supply growing hand in hand. If government involvement is needed then so be it.

In what circumstances is government needed?

.

There are two major justifications for government involvement. Efficiency and Morality. I will start with just some of the efficiency reasons.

When foreign governments are involved. When markets become too inelastic. When there is a contraction in the effective supply of money. When there is a temporary correction happening with regards to demand. When it is difficult to monetize the benefit (This applies to things like infrastructure and education). Safety. Health.

From a moral standpoint I think the government can justify things like healthcare but there is also an efficiency component to healthcare. Especially for the youth and the workers. I consider disability benefits to be a moral stance.

I also think that the best help that can be provided to the poor is a better wage. This is a battle of perception as much as reality.

Idiot. Government's place is NOT to legislate morality. HOW did prohibition do? Hmm? YOU know nothing of the Founders and true liberty. NOTHING.
 
Last edited:
Cut the crap. Human beings/human activity creates inequality. Some are smarter than others. Some work harder than others. Some make better choices. Some are selfish. Some are greedy. Some are lazy. Some are stupid. Some are lucky...some not. Inequality is. That is why the nuns told me to concentrate on saving my soul...so as to be happy with God in heaven...and not to fret over who has what. Pax vobiscum.
Indeed. You have the liberty to be smart, dumb, pursue whatever motivates you while understanding the consequences of your actions. When your stupidity infringes upon MY liberty and those of my fellow citizens and WE have to pay for your stupidity for NO fault of our own? Then Houston? WE have a problem.
 
If you consider disability payments a moral stance...I have two family members...each with a combined family income of 200k ...both working full time...each getting about $1500 disability check each month...they earned it...and if I were in their shoes I'd take it...and it may be moral...but is it affordable?
 
If you consider disability payments a moral stance...I have two family members...each with a combined family income of 200k ...both working full time...each getting about $1500 disability check each month...they earned it...and if I were in their shoes I'd take it...and it may be moral...but is it affordable?
If they earned it? What's the problem?
 
Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?

A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?

Ready for the best part?

Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.


"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.

"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."

"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the world’s top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.

"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."

Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality

There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."

If you don't like being part of the 2% of the worlds richest people give your money away, move to the Central African Republic, and stop posting on the internet.
 
Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?

A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?

Ready for the best part?

Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.


"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.

"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."

"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the world’s top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.

"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."

Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality

There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."

If you don't like being part of the 2% of the worlds richest people give your money away, move to the Central African Republic, and stop posting on the internet.
I'll start a collection for a ONE WAY ticket to get him there.
 

Forum List

Back
Top