“Redistribute the wealth”

[EGR one]

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief... You are in the top of the top as an American, I say we redistribute this wealth and relocate you to the true socialist utopia where these policies are in place.

You're dead wrong. The rich are rich because they do not pay working people fairly.

/----/ Care to back that nonsense up with some facts?

Fact - Only productive labor creates wealth.

Fact - Ownership does not create wealth.

Fact - Hording wealth is not the same as creating wealth.

So in your strange world ownership of a company doesn't earn wealth? No wonder employees like you are a dime a dozen.


.

I'm a long way from being a dime a dozen employee. Try six figures.

No ownership does not create wealth in and of itself. An owner may do some productive work that creates wealth, but ownership alone does not.

Hording wealth is not the same thing as creating wealth.

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Here’s the problem lefties don’t understand because they fundamentally lack the basic understanding on how capitalism works. Under socialism, wealth is a finite thing. There’s no incentive nor basis upon which to create additional resources or wealth, so it’s limited. We saw it time & time again. But under capitalism, there is no finite limit. Competition & ingenuity drive the model. You can go on creating forever because the well never runs dry. This system is a proven winner time & time again. The idea isn’t to redistribute wealth, but rather generate additional wealth. Only one system does that...

But the bulk of the generated wealth eds up the the pockets of the wealthy. Dumbass

That is patently untrue. The cost of labor is almost always far greater than the profits taken by the capitalists who risk their money in a venture. A venture that would likely not even have taken place without capital and organization. No venture, no jobs.

 

[EGR one]

Oh really?

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

In a manner analogous to that Good capitalist who found capital solutions and did not make, "social excuses". He doubled autoworker wages not complain about minimum wages.

We have to keep an upward pressure on wages to ensure capital seeks gains from productivity instead of more stagnant, cheap labor.

Contrary to left wing propaganda, Henry Ford did not offer higher wages because he was a good guy. He offered $5 a day because he needed to attract and keep a work force on the assembly line.

/----/ H Ford also wanted to create new customers. At $5 a day, they could afford to buy his cars.

Propaganda! Henry Ford offered the $5 a day because his workers were quitting on a regular basis. Assembly line work is dull and mind numbing.

 

[EGR one]

How about workers work to learn skills that afford them more worth to employers?

For what should they be given $15 per hour? Flipping a fry tray five times an hour?

If you work 40 hours a week at a wage that matches your skills, why should an employer pay you more?

If you cannot live on $10 per hour, isn't it your responsibility to improve your worth?

Paying people their 'Market value' only means paying the lowest possible wage...if they can replace you with a more desperate worker that they can pay less.. they will. This means that employers have a vested interest in paying as little as possible - and keeping as many people as they can as desperate as possible.

If 20 people flip hamburgers and bring in millions in profits for their employers they deserve a lot more than $15/hr. It doesn't matter if they can be replaced with someone more desperate than they. THEY are doing the work that's earning those millions, and they deserve a fair cut of the profits.

ONLY productive work creates wealth. Those that do the work deserve a fair cut of the profits.

If that's what you believe, then get a job that offers profit sharing as a benefit. If your company doesn't offer profit sharing, buy stock in your company and share the wealth. But don't expect anybody to hand their wealth over to you for nothing.

Nobody is asking for anyone to hand their wealth over for nothing. Workers only want a fair share of the wealth that they create.

I agree that profit sharing is a great idea. Perhaps it should be mandated by law for everyone!

How do you propose I profit share with the workers who mow my lawn? How do I profit share with the pickers who picked the fruit, or the ones who pruned the trees?

I have a better idea. let the people who need labor, and the people who need a job, figure out the financial arrangement without your help.

 

[danielpalos]

even the dollar menu won't double.

Oh really?

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

In a manner analogous to that Good capitalist who found capital solutions and did not make, "social excuses". He doubled autoworker wages not complain about minimum wages.

We have to keep an upward pressure on wages to ensure capital seeks gains from productivity instead of more stagnant, cheap labor.

Contrary to left wing propaganda, Henry Ford did not offer higher wages because he was a good guy. He offered $5 a day because he needed to attract and keep a work force on the assembly line.

He was a Good Capitalist, not a lousy capitalist whining about Minimum wages not AutoWorker wages.

 

[danielpalos]

No Charity for the homeless from Employers?

If anyone wants to give they can

we have homelessness, in alleged, Right to Work States.

Shouldn't employers promote a work ethic?

Shouldn't you promote your own work ethic

I didn't advocate for Right to Work States.

So what?

You can work at any business that will hire you

Why do we have any poverty, at all?

 

[danielpalos]

You're dead wrong. The rich are rich because they do not pay working people fairly.

/----/ Care to back that nonsense up with some facts?

Fact - Only productive labor creates wealth.

Fact - Ownership does not create wealth.

Fact - Hording wealth is not the same as creating wealth.

So in your strange world ownership of a company doesn't earn wealth? No wonder employees like you are a dime a dozen.


.

I'm a long way from being a dime a dozen employee. Try six figures.

No ownership does not create wealth in and of itself. An owner may do some productive work that creates wealth, but ownership alone does not.

Hording wealth is not the same thing as creating wealth.

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Here’s the problem lefties don’t understand because they fundamentally lack the basic understanding on how capitalism works. Under socialism, wealth is a finite thing. There’s no incentive nor basis upon which to create additional resources or wealth, so it’s limited. We saw it time & time again. But under capitalism, there is no finite limit. Competition & ingenuity drive the model. You can go on creating forever because the well never runs dry. This system is a proven winner time & time again. The idea isn’t to redistribute wealth, but rather generate additional wealth. Only one system does that...

But the bulk of the generated wealth eds up the the pockets of the wealthy. Dumbass

That is patently untrue. The cost of labor is almost always far greater than the profits taken by the capitalists who risk their money in a venture. A venture that would likely not even have taken place without capital and organization. No venture, no jobs.

citation or it never happens, but in right wing fantasy.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Oh really?

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

In a manner analogous to that Good capitalist who found capital solutions and did not make, "social excuses". He doubled autoworker wages not complain about minimum wages.

We have to keep an upward pressure on wages to ensure capital seeks gains from productivity instead of more stagnant, cheap labor.

Contrary to left wing propaganda, Henry Ford did not offer higher wages because he was a good guy. He offered $5 a day because he needed to attract and keep a work force on the assembly line.

He was a Good Capitalist, not a lousy capitalist whining about Minimum wages not AutoWorker wages.

Once again Henry was pissed off when his employees started showing up to work driving Chevy's after he gave them a raise, but you always forget to mention that

 

[danielpalos]

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

In a manner analogous to that Good capitalist who found capital solutions and did not make, "social excuses". He doubled autoworker wages not complain about minimum wages.

We have to keep an upward pressure on wages to ensure capital seeks gains from productivity instead of more stagnant, cheap labor.

Contrary to left wing propaganda, Henry Ford did not offer higher wages because he was a good guy. He offered $5 a day because he needed to attract and keep a work force on the assembly line.

He was a Good Capitalist, not a lousy capitalist whining about Minimum wages not AutoWorker wages.

Once again Henry was pissed off when his employees started showing up to work driving Chevy's after he gave them a raise, but you always forget to mention that

why should i; capitalism works--right wing whinery, doesn't.

 

[Meister]

If anyone wants to give they can

we have homelessness, in alleged, Right to Work States.

Shouldn't employers promote a work ethic?

Shouldn't you promote your own work ethic

I didn't advocate for Right to Work States.

So what?

You can work at any business that will hire you

Why do we have any poverty, at all?

define poverty

 

[Hiryuu]

lol. Folks, there is no unemployment under Capitalism, only under payment.

And because it properly identifies the actual minimum wage at $0 an hour.

 

[Cellblock2429]

/----/ Care to back that nonsense up with some facts?

Fact - Only productive labor creates wealth.

Fact - Ownership does not create wealth.

Fact - Hording wealth is not the same as creating wealth.

So in your strange world ownership of a company doesn't earn wealth? No wonder employees like you are a dime a dozen.


.

I'm a long way from being a dime a dozen employee. Try six figures.

No ownership does not create wealth in and of itself. An owner may do some productive work that creates wealth, but ownership alone does not.

Hording wealth is not the same thing as creating wealth.

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Here’s the problem lefties don’t understand because they fundamentally lack the basic understanding on how capitalism works. Under socialism, wealth is a finite thing. There’s no incentive nor basis upon which to create additional resources or wealth, so it’s limited. We saw it time & time again. But under capitalism, there is no finite limit. Competition & ingenuity drive the model. You can go on creating forever because the well never runs dry. This system is a proven winner time & time again. The idea isn’t to redistribute wealth, but rather generate additional wealth. Only one system does that...

But the bulk of the generated wealth eds up the the pockets of the wealthy. Dumbass

That is patently untrue. The cost of labor is almost always far greater than the profits taken by the capitalists who risk their money in a venture. A venture that would likely not even have taken place without capital and organization. No venture, no jobs.

citation or it never happens, but in right wing fantasy.

/------/ "citation or it never happens, but in right wing fantasy." I love this fake outrage demand. Like Libtards post links to back up all their crapola.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The lower the minimum wage the higher the level of corporate welfare. The tax payer foots the bill in any scenario.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Tax breaks to billionaires sees the money go to Panama. Tax breaks for the poorest sees the money immediately recycled into the economy.
I struggle with the mindset of people who dont want poorly paid workers to get a bit more.

 

[Cellblock2429]

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

In a manner analogous to that Good capitalist who found capital solutions and did not make, "social excuses". He doubled autoworker wages not complain about minimum wages.

We have to keep an upward pressure on wages to ensure capital seeks gains from productivity instead of more stagnant, cheap labor.

Contrary to left wing propaganda, Henry Ford did not offer higher wages because he was a good guy. He offered $5 a day because he needed to attract and keep a work force on the assembly line.

/----/ H Ford also wanted to create new customers. At $5 a day, they could afford to buy his cars.

Propaganda! Henry Ford offered the $5 a day because his workers were quitting on a regular basis. Assembly line work is dull and mind numbing.

/----/ Propagan

The lower the minimum wage the higher the level of corporate welfare. The tax payer foots the bill in any scenario.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Tax breaks to billionaires sees the money go to Panama. Tax breaks for the poorest sees the money immediately recycled into the economy.
I struggle with the mindset of people who dont want poorly paid workers to get a bit more.

/----/ Sounds like you're just guessing what people do with their money based on your class envy.

 

[danielpalos]

we have homelessness, in alleged, Right to Work States.

Shouldn't employers promote a work ethic?

Shouldn't you promote your own work ethic

I didn't advocate for Right to Work States.

So what?

You can work at any business that will hire you

Why do we have any poverty, at all?

define poverty

lack of unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. Folks, there is no unemployment under Capitalism, only under payment.

And because it properly identifies the actual minimum wage at $0 an hour.

There is no unemployment, Only underpayment.

How much unemployment with zero an hour?

 

[danielpalos]

Fact - Only productive labor creates wealth.

Fact - Ownership does not create wealth.

Fact - Hording wealth is not the same as creating wealth.

So in your strange world ownership of a company doesn't earn wealth? No wonder employees like you are a dime a dozen.


.

I'm a long way from being a dime a dozen employee. Try six figures.

No ownership does not create wealth in and of itself. An owner may do some productive work that creates wealth, but ownership alone does not.

Hording wealth is not the same thing as creating wealth.

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Here’s the problem lefties don’t understand because they fundamentally lack the basic understanding on how capitalism works. Under socialism, wealth is a finite thing. There’s no incentive nor basis upon which to create additional resources or wealth, so it’s limited. We saw it time & time again. But under capitalism, there is no finite limit. Competition & ingenuity drive the model. You can go on creating forever because the well never runs dry. This system is a proven winner time & time again. The idea isn’t to redistribute wealth, but rather generate additional wealth. Only one system does that...

But the bulk of the generated wealth eds up the the pockets of the wealthy. Dumbass

That is patently untrue. The cost of labor is almost always far greater than the profits taken by the capitalists who risk their money in a venture. A venture that would likely not even have taken place without capital and organization. No venture, no jobs.

citation or it never happens, but in right wing fantasy.

/------/ "citation or it never happens, but in right wing fantasy." I love this fake outrage demand. Like Libtards post links to back up all their crapola.
View attachment 213432

lol. Especial with this guy on the left; a good argument or a link.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Shouldn't you promote your own work ethic

I didn't advocate for Right to Work States.

So what?

You can work at any business that will hire you

Why do we have any poverty, at all?

define poverty

lack of unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed.

/---/ When I was unemployed with no UE comp, I went out and found work and sometimes the part time jobs turned into well paying full time work. Imagine that.

 

[Cellblock2429]

lol. Folks, there is no unemployment under Capitalism, only under payment.

And because it properly identifies the actual minimum wage at $0 an hour.

There is no unemployment, Only underpayment.

How much unemployment with zero an hour?

/----/ "How much unemployment with zero an hour?"

 

[Hiryuu]

There is no unemployment, Only underpayment.

How much unemployment with zero an hour?

It depends on whether or not you consider room and board as payment, then the job would vary with expectations.

 

[danielpalos]

I didn't advocate for Right to Work States.

So what?

You can work at any business that will hire you

Why do we have any poverty, at all?

define poverty

lack of unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed.

/---/ When I was unemployed with no UE comp, I went out and found work and sometimes the part time jobs turned into well paying full time work. Imagine that.
View attachment 213468

No need to imagine at all;

why complain about other illegals?