the only remaining argument against capatalism

[Dad2three]

The left always forget to mention one little thing. They don't want to work hard to get reward, just get reward.
The lift might very well be broken, so get your arse in gear and climb the fucking stairs.

^^^ you nailed it! Look at most rags to riches stories and you will see a poor person who busted their ass working hard, taking risks, refusing to fail not sitting around on their fat ass with their hand out demanding a share of someone else's earnings.

WHAT CHANGED ABOUT 1981???

 

[Dad2three]

The best and greatest argument against the burgoise society otherwise known as capitalism is the moral argument. I just keep mentioning wealth gap or how it is unfair and people are so outraged that they rush to shut it down.

Who are you to judge what is moral; who are you to impose that judgement on others?

"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it." Thomas Jefferson

 

[Indofred]

ight the bottom half of US, 150 million people who earn 11% of the entire pie (half as much as the top 1% of US) and yet the richest 400 have as much wealth as the bottom HALF of US, MUST be they are lazy *shaking head*

Either lazy, or just too stupid to get up the ladder.

It's easy to find moronic prols to flip a burger, but hard work to find people with the ability to run a massive, multinational business.

That's why the best get paid, and the rest flip their burgers.

 

[Dad2three]

Over the past 30 years the rich in America have become a lot richer, while many millions of Americans have seen their income stagnate or decline. As Warren Buffett, the second richest man in America, famously said, “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

Wealth and income inequality today is by far the worst in the industrialized world and has fallen in line with many Third World countries. Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz explains why this is bad news:

Some people look at income inequality and shrug their shoulders. So what if this person gains and that person loses? What matters, they argue, is not how the pie is divided but the size of the pie. That argument is fundamentally wrong. An economy in which most citizens are doing worse year after year—an economy like America’s—is not likely to do well over the long haul.

…

The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live. Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn. Too late.

Where Has All the Money Gone?
This may be the one of the most important graphs you will ever see. It show the reason for the decline of the American middle class — how the rich have become so much richer in the last 30 years and why the rest of us have been left behind:

In the post World War II period through the mid 1970s the productivity of the American worker increased at a steady rate. During this period workers were rewarded for their increased productivity with a commensurate increase in wages. Then something happened. Productivity continued to increase, but workers’ wages stagnated.


American Pie Wealth and Income Inequality in America Curry County Democrats

 

[whitehall]

The what??? The "moral" argument by whom, Saul Alinisky? It's impossible to propose a "moral" argument that supports the confiscation of wealth. Someone has to run the system so the "moral" assumption is that the elites are allowed to accumulate wealth while the rest of society is forced to become drones working for the government without any hope of ever rising above the status that the government dictates.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The wealth gap then:
Poor people walk where they need to go on dirty, dusty roads, lucky to have shoes.
Rich people ride in horse-drawn carriages.

The wealth gap now:
Poor people drive their 2001 Ford Focus hither and thither.
Rich people drive their 2016 Lamborghini to and fro.

This dramatic decrease in the wealth gap brought to you by Capitalism.

Really?


The inequality gap, brought to you by conservative policy (can you say trickle down???)

"Trickle down" is a made up progressive buzzword.. there is no such thing.

Nice try though.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The best and greatest argument against the burgoise society otherwise known as capitalism is the moral argument. I just keep mentioning wealth gap or how it is unfair and people are so outraged that they rush to shut it down.

Who are you to judge what is moral; who are you to impose that judgement on others?

"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it." Thomas Jefferson

In terms of securing their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
So, I ask again:
Who are you to judge what is moral; who are you to impose that judgement on others?

 

[BlackSand]

Capitalism is good and what we should use. But if we Americans aren't smart enough to notice when it's turning into Crony Capitalistm, then we need to discuss something further.

Today, politics and this topic, are polar opposites. Capitalists think there is nothing wrong with it in any way shape or form. People who want a different system see the flaws and jump to changing the system. Reminds me of Unions.

What would happen if we just accepted the flaws, learned and grew from them? The flaws are in our face. Capitalism is NOT pretty right now. Accept it and adapt.

I think it would be somewhat hard to sell the idea that government regulating, taxing or redistributing anyone's money would actually be keeping the money out politics.
As long as both sides are using the one side's money for political gain ... I don't give a shit which side wants to complain about the other side not being fair.

.

 

[BluesLegend]

The left always forget to mention one little thing. They don't want to work hard to get reward, just get reward.
The lift might very well be broken, so get your arse in gear and climb the fucking stairs.

^^^ you nailed it! Look at most rags to riches stories and you will see a poor person who busted their ass working hard, taking risks, refusing to fail not sitting around on their fat ass with their hand out demanding a share of someone else's earnings.

WHAT CHANGED ABOUT 1981???

Big government is now spewing out 80,000 pages of jobs killing regulations each year at a cost of $2 trillion dollars.

 

[Dad2three]

ight the bottom half of US, 150 million people who earn 11% of the entire pie (half as much as the top 1% of US) and yet the richest 400 have as much wealth as the bottom HALF of US, MUST be they are lazy *shaking head*

Either lazy, or just too stupid to get up the ladder.

It's easy to find moronic prols to flip a burger, but hard work to find people with the ability to run a massive, multinational business.

That's why the best get paid, and the rest flip their burgers.

Yeah, BECAUSE the US had a more equal society before trickle down, must not have had many "hard workers" 1945-1980 right?


Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory

The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

These three sentences do nothing less than blow apart the central tenet of modern conservative economic theory, confirming that lowering tax rates on the wealthy does nothing to grow the economy while doing a great deal to concentrate more wealth in the pockets of those at the very top of the income chain.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes

Profits Just Hit Another All-Time High, Wages Just Hit Another All-Time Low

1) Corporate profit margins just hit another all-time high. Companies are making more per dollar of sales than they ever have before. (And some people are still saying that companies are suffering from "too much regulation" and "too many taxes." Maybe little companies are, but big ones certainly aren't. What they're suffering from is a myopic obsession with short-term profits at the expense of long-term value creation).





2) Wages as a percent of the economy just hit another all-time low. Why are corporate profits so high? One reason is that companies are paying employees less than they ever have as a share of GDP. And that, in turn, is one reason the economy is so weak: Those "wages" are represent spending power for consumers. And consumer spending is "revenue" for other companies. So the profit obsession is actually starving the rest of the economy of revenue growth.




In short, our current obsessed-with-profits philosophy is creating a country of a few million overlords and 300+ million serfs.
Profits At High Wages At Low - Business Insider

 

[Dad2three]

The left always forget to mention one little thing. They don't want to work hard to get reward, just get reward.
The lift might very well be broken, so get your arse in gear and climb the fucking stairs.

^^^ you nailed it! Look at most rags to riches stories and you will see a poor person who busted their ass working hard, taking risks, refusing to fail not sitting around on their fat ass with their hand out demanding a share of someone else's earnings.

WHAT CHANGED ABOUT 1981???

Big government is now spewing out 80,000 pages of jobs killing regulations each year at a cost of $2 trillion dollars.

Good talking point Bubba. YET Record Corp profits and the "job creators" haven't been this rich since before the first GOP great depression. Go figure

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yeah, BECAUSE the US had a more equal society before trickle down, must not have had many "hard workers" 1945-1980 right?

Why do you choose to not understand that "equality" as the term is used in the context of the creation of this country and its government refers to equal treatment under the law, not equal wages or equal wealth?

 

[Stephanie]

The green eyed Monsters is what going to bring this country down. and one Party has a way of preaching that. guess which one that is...there's a reason for it.

 

[BluesLegend]

The left always forget to mention one little thing. They don't want to work hard to get reward, just get reward.
The lift might very well be broken, so get your arse in gear and climb the fucking stairs.

^^^ you nailed it! Look at most rags to riches stories and you will see a poor person who busted their ass working hard, taking risks, refusing to fail not sitting around on their fat ass with their hand out demanding a share of someone else's earnings.

WHAT CHANGED ABOUT 1981???

Big government is now spewing out 80,000 pages of jobs killing regulations each year at a cost of $2 trillion dollars.

Good talking point Bubba. YET Record Corp profits and the "job creators" haven't been this rich since before the first GOP great depression. Go figure

When you have 80,000 pages of regulations dumped on you yearly where is the incentive to re-invest that wealth and create more jobs? Its idiots like you who are part of the problem voting for idiots like Obama.

 

[Dad2three]

The wealth gap then:
Poor people walk where they need to go on dirty, dusty roads, lucky to have shoes.
Rich people ride in horse-drawn carriages.

The wealth gap now:
Poor people drive their 2001 Ford Focus hither and thither.
Rich people drive their 2016 Lamborghini to and fro.

This dramatic decrease in the wealth gap brought to you by Capitalism.

Really?


The inequality gap, brought to you by conservative policy (can you say trickle down???)

"Trickle down" is a made up progressive buzzword.. there is no such thing.

Nice try though.

Sure Bubba, sure

This is how Investorpedia describes it:

Supply-side economics is better known to some as “Reaganomics“, or the “trickle-down” policy espoused by former U.S. president Ronald Reagan. He popularized the controversial idea that greater tax cuts for investors and entrepreneurs provide incentives to save and invest and produce economic benefits that trickle down into the overall economy.

In other words, if government economic policy focuses on making the rich richer, the benefits will “trickle down” to everyone else. As supply-siders are fond of saying, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” Since Supply Side economics came to dominate American economic policy during the Reagan administration, the rising economic tide has certainly lifted a lot of yachts, but at the same time it has left most of the row boats stuck in the mud.

The past quarter century of Republican economics has proven that the trickle down theory is just a convenient excuse to justify an economic policy favoring the rich, with the benefits trickling up to make the very wealthy even wealthier.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Over the past 30 years the rich in America have become a lot richer, while many millions of Americans have seen their income stagnate or decline. As Warren Buffett, the second richest man in America, famously said, “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

Wealth and income inequality today is by far the worst in the industrialized world and has fallen in line with many Third World countries. Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz explains why this is bad news:

Some people look at income inequality and shrug their shoulders. So what if this person gains and that person loses? What matters, they argue, is not how the pie is divided but the size of the pie. That argument is fundamentally wrong. An economy in which most citizens are doing worse year after year—an economy like America’s—is not likely to do well over the long haul.

…

The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live. Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn. Too late.

Where Has All the Money Gone?
This may be the one of the most important graphs you will ever see. It show the reason for the decline of the American middle class — how the rich have become so much richer in the last 30 years and why the rest of us have been left behind:

In the post World War II period through the mid 1970s the productivity of the American worker increased at a steady rate. During this period workers were rewarded for their increased productivity with a commensurate increase in wages. Then something happened. Productivity continued to increase, but workers’ wages stagnated.


American Pie Wealth and Income Inequality in America Curry County Democrats

Over the past 30 years the rich in America have become a lot richer, while many millions of Americans have seen their income stagnate or decline. As Warren Buffett, the second richest man in America, famously said, “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

That's awful! Maybe Warren should give more of his money to the government?
Instead, he does everything he can to give the government nothing.

 

[Dad2three]

The best and greatest argument against the burgoise society otherwise known as capitalism is the moral argument. I just keep mentioning wealth gap or how it is unfair and people are so outraged that they rush to shut it down.

Who are you to judge what is moral; who are you to impose that judgement on others?

"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it." Thomas Jefferson

In terms of securing their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
So, I ask again:
Who are you to judge what is moral; who are you to impose that judgement on others?

Why Thomas Jefferson Favored Profit Sharing
By David Cay Johnston

The founders, despite decades of rancorous disagreements about almost every other aspect of their grand experiment, agreed that America would survive and thrive only if there was widespread ownership of land and businesses.

George Washington, nine months before his inauguration as the first president, predicted that America "will be the most favorable country of any kind in the world for persons of industry and frugality, possessed of moderate capital, to inhabit." And, he continued, "it will not be less advantageous to the happiness of the lowest class of people, because of the equal distribution of property."

The second president, John Adams, feared "monopolies of land" would destroy the nation and that a business aristocracy born of inequality would manipulate voters, creating "a system of subordination to all... The capricious will of one or a very few" dominating the rest. Unless constrained, Adams wrote, "the rich and the proud" would wield economic and political power that "will destroy all the equality and liberty, with the consent and acclamations of the people themselves."

James Madison, the Constitution's main author, described inequality as an evil, saying government should prevent "an immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches." He favored "the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigents towards a state of comfort."


Alexander Hamilton, who championed manufacturing and banking as the first Treasury secretary, also argued for widespread ownership of assets, warning in 1782 that, "whenever a discretionary power is lodged in any set of men over the property of their neighbors, they will abuse it."

Late in life, Adams, pessimistic about whether the republic would endure, wrote that the goal of the democratic government was not to help the wealthy and powerful but to achieve "the greatest happiness for the greatest number."



http://www.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/why-thomas-jefferson-favored-profit-sharing-245454.html

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

ight the bottom half of US, 150 million people who earn 11% of the entire pie (half as much as the top 1% of US) and yet the richest 400 have as much wealth as the bottom HALF of US, MUST be they are lazy *shaking head*

Either lazy, or just too stupid to get up the ladder.

It's easy to find moronic prols to flip a burger, but hard work to find people with the ability to run a massive, multinational business.

That's why the best get paid, and the rest flip their burgers.

Yeah, BECAUSE the US had a more equal society before trickle down, must not have had many "hard workers" 1945-1980 right?


Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory

The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

These three sentences do nothing less than blow apart the central tenet of modern conservative economic theory, confirming that lowering tax rates on the wealthy does nothing to grow the economy while doing a great deal to concentrate more wealth in the pockets of those at the very top of the income chain.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes

Profits Just Hit Another All-Time High, Wages Just Hit Another All-Time Low

1) Corporate profit margins just hit another all-time high. Companies are making more per dollar of sales than they ever have before. (And some people are still saying that companies are suffering from "too much regulation" and "too many taxes." Maybe little companies are, but big ones certainly aren't. What they're suffering from is a myopic obsession with short-term profits at the expense of long-term value creation).





2) Wages as a percent of the economy just hit another all-time low. Why are corporate profits so high? One reason is that companies are paying employees less than they ever have as a share of GDP. And that, in turn, is one reason the economy is so weak: Those "wages" are represent spending power for consumers. And consumer spending is "revenue" for other companies. So the profit obsession is actually starving the rest of the economy of revenue growth.




In short, our current obsessed-with-profits philosophy is creating a country of a few million overlords and 300+ million serfs.
Profits At High Wages At Low - Business Insider

In short, our current obsessed-with-profits philosophy is creating a country of a few million overlords and 300+ million serfs.

Let's import millions of serfs from other countries, to compete with our own.
Easier than sealing the border.

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah, BECAUSE the US had a more equal society before trickle down, must not have had many "hard workers" 1945-1980 right?

Why do you choose to not understand that "equality" as the term is used in the context of the creation of this country and its government refers to equal treatment under the law, not equal wages or equal wealth?

Yeah, BECAUSE the left expects a doctor to make the same wages as a garbageman *shaking head*

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The wealth gap then:
Poor people walk where they need to go on dirty, dusty roads, lucky to have shoes.
Rich people ride in horse-drawn carriages.

The wealth gap now:
Poor people drive their 2001 Ford Focus hither and thither.
Rich people drive their 2016 Lamborghini to and fro.

This dramatic decrease in the wealth gap brought to you by Capitalism.

Superficial America is what you mean. We can still challenge ourselves on success without giving the same car to everyone. I know American politics are proving me wrong today, but maybe. People might get smarter.

Completely at odds with reality.

The wealth gap then:
Poor people walk where they need to go on dirty, dusty roads, lucky to have shoes.
Rich people ride in horse-drawn carriages.

The wealth gap now:
Poor people drive their 2001 Ford Focus hither and thither.
Rich people drive their 2016 Lamborghini to and fro.

This dramatic decrease in the wealth gap brought to you by Capitalism.

Really?


The inequality gap, brought to you by conservative policy (can you say trickle down???)

Are the poor better off today than they were 100 years ago? This idea of a wealth gap tells just around none of the whole story. It's terrible, to me, that I'm not pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars a year like LeBron James, and yet my standard of living would still make the so-called "robber barons" of their day green with envy. Yes, the rich get richer, but so do the poor, and at a much faster rate, as my previous post points out.

So partisan claptrap is evidence of what again?