Smart Man Discusses Income Inequality

[wihosa]

Why did the congress pass the foreign corrupt business act? The one Sheldon Adelson just admitted violating.
I guess congress didn't know that bribing is fine and only taking bribes is bad.

 

[wihosa]

That's not what I'm arguing. Of course people with more money will spend more money. That's not just basic economics, that's common sense.

What you have yet to answer is how will the rich banker having 40 billion versus 400 billion effectively put more money into the pockets of the poor and middle class? Are you telling me that somehow the supply of money is limited and the rich must release some of it back into the "money pool" so others can get their hands on it? I'd strongly disagree.

And I'd go further back another 50 to 60 years from then. How was income inequality back in those days? I'd argue that was the period of greatest growth and innovation the world has ever seen. And from my understanding, there were only a handful of millionaires back then.

Yes put the money into the people's hands, they will spend the money, the billionaire can't possibly spend all his money. There are mountains of cash being held by billionaires with nowhere to go. Why do you think interest rates are so low right now?

Great. You want poor people to have money. That's very noble of you.

Now explain to me, how will having the billionaire go from 400 to 40 billion actually put money into their hands?

One thing that would be very effective would be to raise the minimum wage.

 

[tooAlive]

And I don't care if you live in poverty for the rest of your miserable life. But it is the job of government to tax the ultra wealthy at a level where they are paying for all the benes they have bought with bribes, I mean campaign contributions, from the Federal Government.



Cause it sure as fuk ain't my job to suck it up so the ultra wealthy can have more.
If you want to give the ultra wealthy your pay check, have at it. No ones stopping you from sending them a check. Just pick one out and send them money. They won't mind.

Love how you guys put all the blame on the wealthy but nary a word about the politicians role in it all. The problem isn't the ultra wealthy bribing those in government, per se, it's that those in government take the bribes and as long as they are perfectly fine with being for sale, someone will be offering to buy them. The 545 should be tossed out on their collective asses.

So bribery is a one way street? Those taking the bribes-criminals those doing the bribing - just businessmen?

See, this is where the term ignorant fits nicely.

You'd willingly turn a blind eye to some corruption and only acknowledge another simply because it benefits your political leaning.

 

[Katzndogz]

And there is the problem muddy and you are to stupid to understand it. Used to be, when you did all the things you mentioned; school, work hard, etc, you would most assuredly find a decent to excellent job. Not that bullshit of "maybe you'll get a good payday"

Now that the rethugs have pretty much destroyed that ability to find a good paying job,
the dream turns into a nightmare. A college degree with 40 thousand in debt and a 9 dollar an hour job is not the American Dream I grew up on.

Maybe it is for you.

And here is the problem. You want to find a decent job. You don't want to put in the effort to create the job of your dreams. You just want to wait around until someone gives you what you want.

And you wonder why you are never going to become wealthy.

This rests on the assumption that hard work pays off. There is little reason to believe that true. It's certainly true for some people, but when a child born to upper class parents who drops out of high school has a greater change of being upper class himself than a child from lower classes who has an advanced degree, that tells you this argument about merit is glossing over something major.

You should be directed to Dr. Ben Carson.

 

[rightwinger]

That's not what I'm arguing. Of course people with more money will spend more money. That's not just basic economics, that's common sense.

What you have yet to answer is how will the rich banker having 40 billion versus 400 billion effectively put more money into the pockets of the poor and middle class? Are you telling me that somehow the supply of money is limited and the rich must release some of it back into the "money pool" so others can get their hands on it? I'd strongly disagree.

And I'd go further back another 50 to 60 years from then. How was income inequality back in those days? I'd argue that was the period of greatest growth and innovation the world has ever seen. And from my understanding, there were only a handful of millionaires back then.

Yes put the money into the people's hands, they will spend the money, the billionaire can't possibly spend all his money. There are mountains of cash being held by billionaires with nowhere to go. Why do you think interest rates are so low right now?

Great. You want poor people to have money. That's very noble of you.

Now explain to me, how will having the billionaire go from 400 to 40 billion actually put money into their hands?

Who said anything about him going from $400 billion to $40 billion?

We are talking about not continuing programs that allow him to go from $400 billion to $600 billion (nobody is that rich, but it is your example)

You put money in peoples hands through affordable healthcare costs, lower education costs, affordable housing, retirement plans

 

[Darkwind]

How can we explain the unwillingness of many lower and middle class Americans to recognize the value in preventing the toxic inequality that we now face?

Anyone with an ability to understand English and an interest in the subject matter cannot watch the two videos that I posted here and come away with a careless attitude regarding income inequality unless they have some issues with reality.

Your premise is that the videos you show are factual and true. A failure in both cases. Simply because you chose to believe them does not mean that they are correct, or accurately portray reality.

 

[wihosa]

Love how you guys put all the blame on the wealthy but nary a word about the politicians role in it all. The problem isn't the ultra wealthy bribing those in government, per se, it's that those in government take the bribes and as long as they are perfectly fine with being for sale, someone will be offering to buy them. The 545 should be tossed out on their collective asses.

So bribery is a one way street? Those taking the bribes-criminals those doing the bribing - just businessmen?

See, this is where the term ignorant fits nicely.

You'd willingly turn a blind eye to some corruption and only acknowledge another simply because it benefits your political leaning.

You are misunderstanding. I'm saying that bribery is wrong both for the briber and the bribee. Bribery corrupts democracy, this is why it is illegal.

 

[rightwinger]

40% of Americans 2 tenths of a percentage of the wealth

Why do we continue programs that help those laughingly named "Job Creators" ????

It would be more accurate if you didn't use a pie graph next time. That implies wealth is finite. It's not.

It falls back to JFKs "A rising tide lifts all boats" doesn't it?

But in todays economy "A rising tide only lifts the yachts"

What is the impact if future government programs no longer help the top 1 % but are directed to the bottom 40%?

If the top 1% were to move from having 34.6% of the wealth to 34.4% of the wealth we DOUBLE the wealth of 40% of the population

 

[Zoom-boing]

And I don't care if you live in poverty for the rest of your miserable life. But it is the job of government to tax the ultra wealthy at a level where they are paying for all the benes they have bought with bribes, I mean campaign contributions, from the Federal Government.



Cause it sure as fuk ain't my job to suck it up so the ultra wealthy can have more.
If you want to give the ultra wealthy your pay check, have at it. No ones stopping you from sending them a check. Just pick one out and send them money. They won't mind.

Love how you guys put all the blame on the wealthy but nary a word about the politicians role in it all. The problem isn't the ultra wealthy bribing those in government, per se, it's that those in government take the bribes and as long as they are perfectly fine with being for sale, someone will be offering to buy them. The 545 should be tossed out on their collective asses.

So bribery is a one way street? Those taking the bribes-criminals those doing the bribing - just businessmen?

As long as corporations hide their bribery under the guise of 'contributions' I'm not sure what can be done to stop them. I do know that corporations don't work for me but the government does. They are my employee and if my employee is taking bribes then they ought to be tossed and put in jail.

 

[mudwhistle]

That's not what I'm arguing. Of course people with more money will spend more money. That's not just basic economics, that's common sense.

What you have yet to answer is how will the rich banker having 40 billion versus 400 billion effectively put more money into the pockets of the poor and middle class? Are you telling me that somehow the supply of money is limited and the rich must release some of it back into the "money pool" so others can get their hands on it? I'd strongly disagree.

And I'd go further back another 50 to 60 years from then. How was income inequality back in those days? I'd argue that was the period of greatest growth and innovation the world has ever seen. And from my understanding, there were only a handful of millionaires back then.

Yes put the money into the people's hands, they will spend the money, the billionaire can't possibly spend all his money. There are mountains of cash being held by billionaires with nowhere to go. Why do you think interest rates are so low right now?

Great. You want poor people to have money. That's very noble of you.

Now explain to me, how will having the billionaire go from 400 to 40 billion actually put money into their hands?

Money that will be out of their hands again even more quickly and back in the hands of the rich.

But the government gets their cut and the low-information voter keeps wanting more and more free stuff.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There will always be income inequality. In fact, there will always be inequality of some sort.

Regardless, it's not a problem. How does it affect you or me if a rich banker has 40 billion versus 400 billion? Would some of his money somehow find its way to me if he didn't have it? Why should it? And if I was offering a product or service, would I get to charge more if that banker somehow had less money? I don't think so.

The only problem with income inequality is envy.

A rich banker can influence legislation with greater impact than you, mostly to his advantage and not to yours. It's really that simple, we live in a plutocracy; sadly you and others like you seem oblivious to that reality.

Yes, we absolutely do live in a plutocracy. And yes again, the rich banker can absolutely influence legislation with his or her bargaining power.

So, what's the solution? Do you think the government will willingly cut them off knowing they provide them with so much money? Why would they help out the poor and middle class if they know they're practically dependent on them?

The solution is simple, public financing of campaigns. Any elected official or candidate who accepts anything more than a cup of coffee from anyone is guilty of a felony, loses his/her job and place on the ballot and goes to prison. Anyone who offers a bribe or campaign 'donation' to any candidate or incumbent is fined 10 to 10,000 times the value of the bribe and sentenced to prison.

Citizens United v. FEC needs to go to the scarp head with the Dred Scott Decision.

Any intentional private effort to mislead the pubic should be charged as perjury and if found guilty the CEO, publisher, producer, owner or other responsible placed in prison and forfeit their asset in the medium which abused the truth.

Of course none of that will happen, but if justice is to be served more white collars need to go to prison.

 

[mudwhistle]

Easiest way to create income equality is make everyone poor, and make yourself rich in the process.

This is why socialists usually die with a huge nest-egg in a Swiss bank account......like Hugo Chavez.

 

[Political Junky]

From the video in the OP ... If you want to live the American dream, move to Denmark.

 

[rightwinger]

Easiest way to create income equality is make everyone poor, and make yourself rich in the process.

This is why socialists usually die with a huge nest-egg in a Swiss bank account......like Hugo Chavez.

As do Capitalist Saudi Princes

 

[LoneLaugher]

Too Alive,

Your question......the one that you keep asking as if nobody has the answer....has been answered in this thread several times.

You are not intelligent enough to grasp it.

 

[tooAlive]

Too Alive,

Your question......the one that you keep asking as if nobody has the answer....has been answered in this thread several times.

You are not intelligent enough to grasp it.

Whatever you say.

I've already made my point and you're incapable of refuting it. All you can concoct are class-envy driven remarks about how you have so little because others are greedy and have too much.

I knew I wasn't going to get much sense out of you, as envy and jealousy make it very hard to think rational thoughts. And once you give those feelings a place to plant their roots, it's very hard to get rid of them.

My main objective was to get to the people that haven't yet given those feelings priority in their lives. Hopefully you can find a way to break free. All the best.

 

[ClosedCaption]

There will always be income equality for the simple fact that not everyone is equal.

It's not inequality per se, but the size of the inequality, that's the point.

What's the magic number where it goes from being bad to good?

Ignorance is not a defense or a point

 

[tooAlive]

It's not inequality per se, but the size of the inequality, that's the point.

What's the magic number where it goes from being bad to good?

Ignorance is not a defense or a point

Ignorance to what?

There's absolutely nothing wrong with income inequality because wealth isn't finite.

A couple of guys in enormous mansions sitting on billions or even trillions isn't holding anyone back. Jeez. Let the class warfare nonsense go.

There will always be people with enormous and extravagant wealth. Get over it. The sooner you people accept this fact the sooner we can get moving again and address real issues in the world. Not devising ways to limit the wealth people can acquire.

 

[The Rabbi]

Is there a magic number? Of course not
Is a severe disparity of wealth good for the country? Of course not

The question is ....We have been executing policies that encourage income and wealth to go to the "job creators" with an understanding that it would trickle down in terms of jobs and a surging economy. It didn't work

So why aren't we dismantling those policies?

Why don't you explain what "severe disparity f wealth" means and why it is bad for the country?

This should be amusing. Cue images of banana republics.

40% of Americans 2 tenths of a percentage of the wealth

Why do we continue programs that help those laughingly named "Job Creators" ????

Like I said, it was amusing. Posting little graphics is no substitute for a reasoned argument. Of course since you cant make a reasoned argument it's all you got.
Pitiful.

 

[ClosedCaption]

What's the magic number where it goes from being bad to good?

Ignorance is not a defense or a point

Ignorance to what?

There's absolutely nothing wrong with income inequality because wealth isn't finite.

Now what does that have to do with why or why not wealth inequality is wrong? You just made a statement of fact and pretended that has anything to do with the topic at hand. Nothing wrong with rain because Rain is Wet!