The Rich in America are Stealing from the Poor

[BluesLegend]

Boo-hoo its not fair some people are smarter than others and earn more.

 

[nodoginnafight]

This is your brain on dimocrap

Start with the basics and work TOWARD complexity.

So let's start with the MOST basic premise.

Is anyone 1.26 million times more productive than anyone else?

You skipped a step.
Should someone's pay be based on productivity alone?

Absolutely.

Are you suggesting someone's pay should be based on market forces that can be manipulated by monopolies?

So your position is that initial investment means nothing?

 

[IDNeon]

This is your brain on dimocrap

Start with the basics and work TOWARD complexity.

So let's start with the MOST basic premise.

Is anyone 1.26 million times more productive than anyone else?

You skipped a step.
Should someone's pay be based on productivity alone?

Absolutely.

Are you suggesting someone's pay should be based on market forces that can be manipulated by monopolies?

So your position is that initial investment means nothing?

Since when does "investment" allow you to appropriate the value of someone else's labor? That's a slave holder's argument. You sound like a slave holder from 1840s.

 

[SwimExpert]

Actually he does "make computers" in that an entire type of computer exists solely to use his operating system. The "personal computer".

Oh geez, you really are a special kind of stupid, aren't you? A "personal computer" is one that designed for personal use by a user without need to access a more powerful mainframe. The term "PC" originally was an acronym for "personal computer" but was corrupted to specifically refer to personal computers using the Windows operating system, because the only way one could use Apple's operating system was on a computer that Apple built (i.e. a Mac). Whereas Apple is one company, building one brand of computers and one brand of operating system, both of which being virtually indistinguishable as a result, personal computers running the Windows operating system are from a variety of brands. As personal computers grew in popularity, the differences in brands were not as interesting to most people as the differences in operating systems. You either had an Apple computer, or you had one of the dozens of other brands that did not run the Mac operating system. Thus, the term "PC" became corrupted to refer to personal computers that were not Macs, i.e. computers running the Windows operating system.

 

[SwimExpert]

No that's not what I'm saying at all.

Well, that's what your post says. You said they are not getting the money they are owed. That means they must not be getting their paychecks.

If they're getting their paychecks than they are getting the money they are owed.

 

[HenryBHough]

Whiners whine.

You expected something else?

 

[IDNeon]

Actually he does "make computers" in that an entire type of computer exists solely to use his operating system. The "personal computer".

Oh geez, you really are a special kind of stupid, aren't you? A "personal computer" is one that designed for personal use by a user without need to access a more powerful mainframe. The term "PC" originally was an acronym for "personal computer" but was corrupted to specifically refer to personal computers using the Windows operating system, because the only way one could use Apple's operating system was on a computer that Apple built (i.e. a Mac). Whereas Apple is one company, building one brand of computers and one brand of operating system, both of which being virtually indistinguishable as a result, personal computers running the Windows operating system are from a variety of brands. As personal computers grew in popularity, the differences in brands were not as interesting to most people as the differences in operating systems. You either had an Apple computer, or you had one of the dozens of other brands that did not run the Mac operating system. Thus, the term "PC" became corrupted to refer to personal computers that were not Macs, i.e. computers running the Windows operating system.

You don't know anything about hardware topology or how machine operators work to read higher language code in binary.

So I'm not going to sit here any let you derail this thread about your pretend assertions.

The entire "personal computer" is an outgrowth of the merging of processor topology and chipset physical attributes with the Microsoft OS to which all other Operating systems of that "class of computer" have adapted.

If you want to see what a non-Personal computer operating system looks like go use an old Red hat server operating system which is designed to work on server racks instead of personal computers and is accessed by a terminal rather than a work station.

Furthermore, about Apple OS, it would not exist without the transformation of computer topology to match Microsoft OS systems. The Apple OS represents an alternative to a standard, not a unique development of a new type of system.

 

[SwimExpert]

What the hell is symantical?

I think he meant Samandriel.

 

[IDNeon]

No that's not what I'm saying at all.

Well, that's what your post says. You said they are not getting the money they are owed. That means they must not be getting their paychecks.

If they're getting their paychecks than they are getting the money they are owed.

Being paid less than the full value of their labor does not mean paychecks are withheld.

 

[SwimExpert]

I'm sure that even someone as stupid as you can understand.

Wrong.

My mistake. You must be even more fucking stupid than I gave you credit for.

 

[rightwinger]

 

[IDNeon]

I'm sure that even someone as stupid as you can understand.

Wrong.

My mistake. You must be even more fucking stupid than I gave you credit for.

Corrected your stupid "cut and snip" misquote for you.

Wrong.

154 million jobs for 315 million people.

50% of all jobs pay less than $12.83/hr.

That is (in America) neigh slavery.

 

[Flash]

Yes I have 2 bachelors and an associates and am working on a 2nd associates in Information Technology and was a firefighter for over 3 years (serving my community).

You can't "work harder" or "smarter" when 50% of all jobs pay $12.83/hour or LESS.

And there are only 154 million jobs for a population of 315 million.

Then you didn't major in the right thing. I have a BS and two MSs and I made a damn good living for 30 years.

You vote for bad Liberal government then you get a screwed up economy that doesn't grow jobs and wages so then you shouldn't bitch about the consequences.

Obama is responsible for this piss poor workforce participation rate by the way.

 

[mudwhistle]

If the rich really are stealing from the poor, they are really dumb.
They'd get a lot more money stealing from other rich people.

Apparently you're too stupid to understand they steal from the poor by making the people poor.

Ok, so what you're saying is that poor people WERE rich people, until other rich people stole their money and made them poor?

The poor people COULD be RICHER if they WERE PAID the fair SHARE of their LABOR.

Get it stupid idiot?

Of course I don't get it yet - I need someone of your superior intellect to explain it.

So you originally said it was poor people getting stolen from ("The Rich in America are Stealing from the Poor"), then you said that poor people are poor because rich people steal from them. But if they are poor, what are the rich stealing from them?

So you think the rich should pay them more. Refusing to give someone else more of your money is not stealing, dude.

What you really mean to say is you can't read my OP and can't make sense of it. Don't try to escape your ignorance it was on display for everyone else to see for many posts now.

It's not the "rich's" money if the poor have worked for it and the rich have withheld it.

I really don't know how stupid you have to be to defend the idea that some ONE is 1.26million times more productive than you?

You have to be a complete moron to believe that.

Let alone believe 3 million (1%) of the US is that much more productive than you.

I think some of the counter-productive assholes balance it all out.

 

[SwimExpert]

They don't have a choice.

Nobody is forcing anyone to work at a given job. And nobody is forcing you to accept a job that pays less than you want. Yes, they do have a choice.

What better work? 50% of all jobs pay less than $12.83/hour.

So then decide what kind of better paying work you would like to do, and build yourself up to be qualified for such a position.

Work hard enough how?

That really sums up the entire liberal universe, doesn't it?

 

[IDNeon]

They don't have a choice.

Nobody is forcing anyone to work at a given job. And nobody is forcing you to accept a job that pays less than you want. Yes, they do have a choice.

What better work? 50% of all jobs pay less than $12.83/hour.

So then decide what kind of better paying work you would like to do, and build yourself up to be qualified for such a position.

Work hard enough how?

That really sums up the entire liberal universe, doesn't it?

No one forces the poor to work at a given job? I must have missed the part where food, clothing, housing, and living standards for children (education and etc) are all free?

So 100% of the people can "decide what kind of better paying work they would like to do and build up to it" when only 50% of the jobs pay more than $12.83/hour?

You aren't really very smart are you?

Work harder and maybe you'll be like 25% of Americans and earn a living wage.

Don't work hard enough and be like the other 75% of lazy bums who wallow in constant poverty!

 

[nodoginnafight]

This is your brain on dimocrap

Start with the basics and work TOWARD complexity.

So let's start with the MOST basic premise.

Is anyone 1.26 million times more productive than anyone else?

You skipped a step.
Should someone's pay be based on productivity alone?

Absolutely.

Are you suggesting someone's pay should be based on market forces that can be manipulated by monopolies?

So your position is that initial investment means nothing?

Since when does "investment" allow you to appropriate the value of someone else's labor? That's a slave holder's argument. You sound like a slave holder from 1840s.

My position is that a businessman who sinks his own money into his business deserves to be compensated for that initial investment. You disagree?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

They don't have a choice.

Nobody is forcing anyone to work at a given job. And nobody is forcing you to accept a job that pays less than you want. Yes, they do have a choice.

What better work? 50% of all jobs pay less than $12.83/hour.

So then decide what kind of better paying work you would like to do, and build yourself up to be qualified for such a position.

Work hard enough how?

That really sums up the entire liberal universe, doesn't it?

No one forces the poor to work at a given job? I must have missed the part where food, clothing, housing, and living standards for children (education and etc) are all free?

So 100% of the people can "decide what kind of better paying work they would like to do and build up to it" when only 50% of the jobs pay more than $12.83/hour?

You aren't really very smart are you?

Work harder and maybe you'll be like 25% of Americans and earn a living wage.

Don't work hard enough and be like the other 75% of lazy bums who wallow in constant poverty!

My God... you're such a whiney baby. Seriously, how old are you?

 

[IDNeon]

They don't have a choice.

Nobody is forcing anyone to work at a given job. And nobody is forcing you to accept a job that pays less than you want. Yes, they do have a choice.

What better work? 50% of all jobs pay less than $12.83/hour.

So then decide what kind of better paying work you would like to do, and build yourself up to be qualified for such a position.

Work hard enough how?

That really sums up the entire liberal universe, doesn't it?

No one forces the poor to work at a given job? I must have missed the part where food, clothing, housing, and living standards for children (education and etc) are all free?

So 100% of the people can "decide what kind of better paying work they would like to do and build up to it" when only 50% of the jobs pay more than $12.83/hour?

You aren't really very smart are you?

Work harder and maybe you'll be like 25% of Americans and earn a living wage.

Don't work hard enough and be like the other 75% of lazy bums who wallow in constant poverty!

My God... you're such a whiney baby. Seriously, how old are you?

So you think 100% of Americans can live a decent life if only 25% of the jobs pay a decent wage?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

They don't have a choice.

Nobody is forcing anyone to work at a given job. And nobody is forcing you to accept a job that pays less than you want. Yes, they do have a choice.

What better work? 50% of all jobs pay less than $12.83/hour.

So then decide what kind of better paying work you would like to do, and build yourself up to be qualified for such a position.

Work hard enough how?

That really sums up the entire liberal universe, doesn't it?

No one forces the poor to work at a given job? I must have missed the part where food, clothing, housing, and living standards for children (education and etc) are all free?

So 100% of the people can "decide what kind of better paying work they would like to do and build up to it" when only 50% of the jobs pay more than $12.83/hour?

You aren't really very smart are you?

Work harder and maybe you'll be like 25% of Americans and earn a living wage.

Don't work hard enough and be like the other 75% of lazy bums who wallow in constant poverty!

My God... you're such a whiney baby. Seriously, how old are you?

Whatever he says subtract 15.