Zone1 Should A Handful Of Billionaires Own More Wealth Than The Bottom 50% Of All Americans?

[Woodznutz]

I’m neither Christian nor Atheist. I believe our lot in life is to suffer, especially when we make mistakes.

Great point. When I stopped making those mistakes, I stopped suffering.

 

[Red Front]

I meant is population reduction part of your scheme.

I know what you meant, and you know what I meant as well. The depopulation scheme doesn't belong to the communists but rather the wealthy ruling elite, who own the technology of production and won't need anyone to work for them anymore. That's where the "depopulation scheme" is at, so look there. Communists will increase the population, because we believe in human progress. We're friendly to technology, and the expansion of the human race, not just here on Earth, but beyond. Communists will lead an effort to explore and colonize space, making humanity a spacefaring species.

The technology to build vast space colonies:

​

You don't believe in exploring or colonizing space, because you're a member of a death cult that believes the world is about to end in a few years or decades. But for most other people, who are rational and value human life, they're for human progress. Humanity extending its presence beyond the Earth, to the stars. Ad Astra.

 

[Red Front]

If God and the Bible doesn't say it's a right, why are you saying that the Bible backs your claim that it's a right? Are you drunk?

All of that chewing tobacco has rotten your brain.

All of that vodka has rotted yours.

I already showed you the verses where your god explicitly states the poor have rights and where he tells people to let the homeless into their homes. You can ignore it, but most other people will recognize that your god expects his followers to house the homeless, under the threat of hell. That being the case, the homeless obviously are entitled to be housed.

 

[Woodznutz]

People will be more than ready for it when advanced automation technology takes most of their jobs, creating an unemployment crisis and homelessness for tens of millions of Americans. I agree with your last statement about home ownership. We call that personal property not private property. Your home is more yours and secure under modern communism than under capitalism. You won't have to pay a bank a mortgage or the government any taxes, because communism doesn't use money or markets. Under capitalism, if you don't pay your property taxes, you lose your home. And of course, if you don't pay the bank, you get your home foreclosed. You have a right to your home in communism, but that's not the case under capitalism.

Such was the case in early America. However, there were no paved roads, water systems, sewer systems, public schools, fire departments, police, city parks, public buildings, State parks, national parks, interstate highways, etc. etc. etc. until taxes were levied. There was no money for taxes until there was wages, and no wages until there was profitable production, and no production until there was capital, no capital until the printing of unified currency by the government, no civic development without the massing of capital/capitalism.

Under your version of communism, we would still return to the dark ages of medieval Europe, or worse.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I already showed you the verses where your god explicitly states the poor have rights and where he tells people to let the homeless into their homes. You can ignore it, but most other people will recognize that your god expects his followers to house the homeless, under the threat of hell.

I didn't see the word "rights" in any of those verses. Try again?

 

[Woodznutz]

I know what you meant, and you know what I meant as well. The depopulation scheme doesn't belong to the communists but rather the wealthy ruling elite, who own the technology of production and won't need anyone to work for them anymore. That's where the "depopulation scheme" is at, so look there. Communists will increase the population, because we believe in human progress. We're friendly to technology, and the expansion of the human race, not just here on Earth, but beyond. Communists will lead an effort to explore and colonize space, making humanity a spacefaring species.

The technology to build vast space colonies:

​

You don't believe in exploring or colonizing space, because you're a member of a death cult that believes the world is about to end in a few years or decades. But for most other people, who are rational and value human life, they're for human progress. Humanity extending its presence beyond the Earth, to the stars. Ad Astra.

We need to greatly reduce our population if we are to survive.

 

[Red Front]

Such was the case in early America. However, there were no paved roads, water systems, sewer systems, public schools, fire departments, police, city parks, public buildings, State parks, national parks, interstate highways, etc. etc. etc. until taxes were levied. There was no money for taxes until there was wages, and no wages until there was profitable production, and no production until there was capital, no capital until the printing of unified currency by the government, no civic development without the massing of capital/capitalism.

You mean civilization built all of that infrastructure. In the not-too-distant future, the mode of production of our civilization will be non-profit due to the fact that advanced automation will eliminate wage-labor. If you can't grasp that or are too stubborn to recognize it, that's your problem. Remain in your cognitive dissonance.

 

[Red Front]

We need to greatly reduce our population if we are to survive.

You can start with yourself. Thank you.

 

[Woodznutz]

You mean civilization built all of that infrastructure. In the not-too-distant future, the mode of production of our civilization will be non-profit due to the fact that advanced automation will eliminate wage-labor. If you can't grasp that or are too stubborn to recognize it, that's your problem. Remain in your cognitive dissonance.

You're the dreamer. 'Advanced automation' will never replace human labor. Like the fallacy of the ToE, there are just too many moving parts to life. There are things that robots just can't do, unless you fashion the world just for robots, and we've already done enough damage to the earth with today's technology.

You're also forgetting that many people enjoy working, with their heads and well as their hands.

 

[Red Front]

I didn't see the word "rights" in any of those verses. Try again?

The term "right of the poor" doesn't equate to "rights" in your convoluted brain? The homeless are entitled to be housed according to God. You deny that at your own peril as a Bible believer. Don't you believe in the Bible? Aren't you a Bible-believing Christian? Apparently not. But anyways, it doesn't matter. If society decides that every one of its members have a right to housing, then that's how it's going to be. The community decides such issues, not you or me as individuals. It's the community.

 

[Red Front]

You're the dreamer. 'Advanced automation' will never replace human labor. Like the fallacy of the ToE, there are just too many moving parts to put the whole thing on autopilot.

That's not what the experts are saying. Advanced automation will eventually eliminate wage labor and make production extremely simple. Human involvement in production will always be required but more in a supervisory role. Monitoring the robots and system.

 

[Woodznutz]

You can start with yourself. Thank you.

I won't be around much longer.

That's not what the experts are saying. Advanced automation will eventually eliminate wage labor and make production extremely simple. Human involvement in production will always be required but more in a supervisory role. Monitoring the robots and system.

View attachment 740905​

Your world will only work when the present generations are dead and gone.

 

[frigidweirdo]

At the urging of Republican Senators Hawley and Rubio, a new think tank is working out ways for the GOP to changetheir messaging.

They want to shift their rhetoric from support for corporations and the morbidly rich to pretending they care about working people. This new organization will, they say, “think differently about labor vs. capital than Republicans have in recent generations.”


It’s a cynical effort to capture Trump’s working class base. He’d promised he’d bring our jobs home from China, empower labor unions, raise taxes on the rich so high that “my friends won’t ever talk to me again,” and give every American full health insurance that cost less than Obamacare. Those promises helped win him the White House.

All were lies, but the GOP base bought it and gave him tens of millions of votes; now Hawley, Rubio, et al think they can bottle that populist rhetorical magic and repeat Trump’s shtick for 2024.

Which raises the existential question both economists and politicians have debated for centuries:


America has had two different but clear answers to that question during the past century.

From the end of the Republican Great Depression with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s until 1981 (including the presidencies of Republican Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon, who maintained the top 91% and 74% income tax rates), the answer was unambiguous: “The economy is here to serve average Americans.”

Income and wealth during that time rose at about the same rate for working class Americans as they did for the rich, something we’d never before seen in this country.

This was not an accident or a mistake. It was the very intentional outcome of policies put into place by FDR and then maintained by both Democratic and Republican administrations for almost 50 years during that pre-Reagan era.

And then came the Reagan Revolution, when Republicans decided that the middle class wasn’t as important as giant corporations and the very wealthy after all, and that the rest of us are here to serve the rich.

Should a Handful of Billionaires Own More Wealth than the Bottom 50% of All Americans?

At the urging of Republican Senators Hawley and Rubio, a new think tank is working out ways for the GOP to change their messaging. They want to shift their rhetoric from support for corporations and the morbidly rich to pretending they care about...

m.dailykos.com

Im sure this will hurt the feminine sensibilities of certain moderators, so I expect it to be moved with not much intelligent input.

No. But when government is run by the rich, they get what they want. A proper government, elected by THE PEOPLE (ie, Proportional Representation) would be more aimed at the people, more likely to have small businesses getting tax benefits, rather than the richest companies.

 

[Red Front]

I won't be around much longer.


Your world will only work when the present generations are dead and gone.

When robots and other systems begin replacing wage labor at a larger scale, that's when people will start waking up to what is happening and their need to look for another mode of production/economic system. At the moment, we're not in the middle of the crisis, so most people are oblivious to what is ahead. In the late 20s, and early 30s, automation with artificial intelligence, and self-driving vehicles, will begin to make a noticeable difference in the job market, and by the 2040s and 50s, it will be apparent to everyone, that production must become non-profit, socialized, and democratized, fully in the hands of the people. It will be a necessity to avoid a civil war between the former owner-employer class and a useless, unemployed worker-class, unable to support itself due to lack of wages. The technology, all of the robots, and facilities of production will be publicly owned. Property of the commons, rather than the private property of a small wealthy elite. The transition from capitalism to high-tech, democratic communism will be around 2045-2055.

 

[Jarlaxle]

People will be more than ready for it when advanced automation technology takes most of their jobs, creating an unemployment crisis and homelessness for tens of millions of Americans. I agree with your last statement about home ownership. We call that personal property not private property. Your home is more yours and secure under modern communism than under capitalism. You won't have to pay a bank a mortgage or the government any taxes, because communism doesn't use money or markets. Under capitalism, if you don't pay your property taxes, you lose your home. And of course, if you don't pay the bank, you get your home foreclosed. You have a right to your home in communism, but that's not the case under capitalism.

This is the stupidest thing ever posted on the internet.

We need to greatly reduce our population if we are to survive.

You first.

 

[Red Front]

This is the stupidest thing ever posted on the internet.



You first.

Why is it stupid?

 

[Batcat]

If you don't like billionaires, there's one thing you can do to stop them.

Stop buying their products and contributing to their wealth.

Any takers.

I have no interest in buying an electric vehicle. Damn things catch on fire.Nor am I interested in going into space as a tourist. I rarely visit Twitter. Sorry, Elon Musk.

Something surprising can cause electric vehicles to catch on fire. Here's what experts want you to know.

Flood waters present a unique danger to electric cars, but data shows fires are far more common in gas vehicles.

news.yahoo.com

 

[toobfreak]

Should A Handful Of Billionaires Own More Wealth Than The Bottom 50% Of All Americans?​

The obvious reply is to ask you to tell us just what you have done in your life that you think is worth a billion dollars to other people?

Now you have your answer.

 

[miketx]

They create customers for themselves because, without jobs, there isn't an economy. Hello. Did you imagine that capitalists hire human labor out of the goodness of their hearts? Do the benefits only run one way? No wage-labor = no paying consumers = no market or capitalism. Labor is more important than billionaires. The ruling elite needs the working-class, whereas the working-class doesn't need the wealthy elite.

Commies are all full of shit.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

At the urging of Republican Senators Hawley and Rubio, a new think tank is working out ways for the GOP to changetheir messaging.

They want to shift their rhetoric from support for corporations and the morbidly rich to pretending they care about working people. This new organization will, they say, “think differently about labor vs. capital than Republicans have in recent generations.”


It’s a cynical effort to capture Trump’s working class base. He’d promised he’d bring our jobs home from China, empower labor unions, raise taxes on the rich so high that “my friends won’t ever talk to me again,” and give every American full health insurance that cost less than Obamacare. Those promises helped win him the White House.

All were lies, but the GOP base bought it and gave him tens of millions of votes; now Hawley, Rubio, et al think they can bottle that populist rhetorical magic and repeat Trump’s shtick for 2024.

Which raises the existential question both economists and politicians have debated for centuries:


America has had two different but clear answers to that question during the past century.

From the end of the Republican Great Depression with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s until 1981 (including the presidencies of Republican Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon, who maintained the top 91% and 74% income tax rates), the answer was unambiguous: “The economy is here to serve average Americans.”

Income and wealth during that time rose at about the same rate for working class Americans as they did for the rich, something we’d never before seen in this country.

This was not an accident or a mistake. It was the very intentional outcome of policies put into place by FDR and then maintained by both Democratic and Republican administrations for almost 50 years during that pre-Reagan era.

And then came the Reagan Revolution, when Republicans decided that the middle class wasn’t as important as giant corporations and the very wealthy after all, and that the rest of us are here to serve the rich.

Should a Handful of Billionaires Own More Wealth than the Bottom 50% of All Americans?

At the urging of Republican Senators Hawley and Rubio, a new think tank is working out ways for the GOP to change their messaging. They want to shift their rhetoric from support for corporations and the morbidly rich to pretending they care about...

m.dailykos.com

Im sure this will hurt the feminine sensibilities of certain moderators, so I expect it to be moved with not much intelligent input.

No one is stopping you from building your own company, using the same tax codes and corporate welfare system, and becoming rich… Well except you!

Notice something that many of those Rich Billionaires are Democrat Voters, so tell us Skew why is it they vote Democrat?