Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And some of the most "successful" among you are greedy beyond belief: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).[/SIZE]
Capitalism is merely economic freedom. Capitalists make everyone rich. We drive market efficiency. It is in fact socialism that takes without giving and leaves "everyone else with no money."
"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.
Do you have any proof of that statement?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.
"In a world of plenty why are hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of people vulnerable at all? The vulnerable and exploited exist because of an inherently unjust social-economic system, which has caused extreme global inequality and built a divided and fractured world society."
Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality
Your corporate butt-sniffing doesn't even quality as a thesis, Greedy.And some of the most "successful" among you are greedy beyond belief:Capitalism is merely economic freedom. Capitalists make everyone rich. We drive market efficiency. It is in fact socialism that takes without giving and leaves "everyone else with no money."
"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.
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.
Do you have any figures for the last six years?Your link:The One Chart That Proves Capitalism Works - PolicyMic
Capitalism is getting the poor in South Africa out of poverty.
It's big Government control & interference that causes more inequality.
"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 worlds 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 worlds 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 proof of that statement?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.
"In a world of plenty why are hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of people vulnerable at all? The vulnerable and exploited exist because of an inherently unjust social-economic system, which has caused extreme global inequality and built a divided and fractured world society."
Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality
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.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.
.
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 worlds 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."
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.
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.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.
.
And some of the most "successful" among you are greedy beyond belief: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).[/SIZE]
Capitalism is merely economic freedom. Capitalists make everyone rich. We drive market efficiency. It is in fact socialism that takes without giving and leaves "everyone else with no money."
"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.
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?
How are you defining "input" and "output"?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....
Modern technology stems from human labor and much of the research that has made it possible comes from public and not private capital.
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).[/SIZE]
Capitalism is merely economic freedom. Capitalists make everyone rich. We drive market efficiency. It is in fact socialism that takes without giving and leaves "everyone else with no money."
.
I'll try again.
Clearly there are people here who are more than willing to point out what they perceive to be the evils of capitalism.
So, and I'm sure you've thought this through, what precisely would you like to see? Let's get specific here, with ideas and/or examples of the following:
- New regulations you'd like to see on business
- Specific marginal income tax rates
- Macro comparisons with other countries
- Constitutional amendments, if any
- New culturally-oriented laws, if any
- Any other specifics of any kind
Let's take full advantage of this forum, and of the anonymity provided by the internet, and really get into the nuts & bolts of what you'd really like to see. You don't like capitalism, great. Take the reins, what, precisely, is your answer for America?
And by the way, it would be great if you could identify potential problems with each idea, so that we can all understand that you've thought it through and recognize red flags that we would need to consider and address upon implementation.
Thanks.
.
Well golly batman, you got me. I'm just a poor stupid election worker and not an economist, but even a poor stupid fucking election worker can see that the income inequality in this country is unsustainable. This moron also knows that we've had this kind of inequality before. What did we do then?
As Obama hammers income inequality, gap grows under his presidency
Between then and now, the share of income gains captured by top earners grew. The top 1 percent saw a 45 percent increase under Clinton and a 65 percent increase under Bush.
That number has dramatically increased since Obama's inauguration in 2009. By 2012, the top 1 percent was back to where it was decades ago -- taking in about a quarter of all pre-tax income. Yet the bottom 90 percent saw their share fall below 50 percent for the first time in history.
Some analysts say this is because Obama was more focused on health care than alleviating unemployment and poverty.
In 2012, the bottom 90 percent was earning an average "real income" of about $30,000 a year. That's similar to what they were earning back in 1980.
But the top 10 percent of earners typically made over a quarter of a million dollars in 2012. And the top 1 percent averaged over $1.2 million in earnings that year. That is where the most dramatic fluctuation can be seen over time, as the gap between lower and top earners has widened.
According to the work of Emmanuel Saez, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, during the post-recession years of 2009-2012, top earners snagged a greater share of total income growth than during the boom years of 2002-2007.
In other words, income inequality has become more pronounced since the Bush administration, not less.
"Rich people have pulled away, largely because the top 1 percent has been doing quite well -- and disproportionately doing quite well under President Obama," Brooks said. "Remember that the stock market has doubled in value since President Obama took office, and at least 80 percent of those gains have gone to the top 10 percent of the income distribution."
Camden just bolsters my case even more you stupid fuck. 
