The risk of income inequality

We never intended Social Security to be your total retirement system. It was expected that workers would own homes and have a financial nest egg to ensure they could retire comfortably
Then we allowed ourselves to destroy that nestegg. Leave a worker barely enough to live on and forget about saving for the future. Go into debt if you want your children to be educated. God forbid you get seriously ill and your life savings are gone. This is the society we have created and it is an embarrassment for a great nation

we keep hearing obamacare is going to free people up from the burden of working for their slave employers for low wages. Now they can go out anf fulfill their dreams and start their own businesses. So how long before we start to see all these people, including the unemployed and welfare slugs getting off thier ass and joining the workforce?

I'm guessing this will be another bullshit liberal spin that blows up in your faces.
 
Well, actually I do. I get you're a product of the public education system, so we'll cut you a break.

But what's really disturbing is that you appear to have no idea what a free society is. March on comrade...:cuckoo:

Now you have me curious

Tell us about your free society

It's called a Constitutional Republic where government is limited to specific enumerated powers beyond which they cannot meddle.

Look into it sometime comrade.

Great nonanswer

How do you envision what a "free society" would look like? How does it operate? How is it funded?
 
They could find completely competent people to do the job for less.

So you think boards of directors choose to pay more for leadership teams than they need to...just 'cuz?

Wow. I'm guessing you have zero executive business experience. Am I right?

Yes it's a rigged game. I do have lots of experience actually.

Then by all means, explain to us in your own words why a board of directors would pay more for leadership than they need to, thereby hurting their own financial interests and creating a competitive disadvantage for the company they oversee.

The floor is yours...
 
Other countries do not pay their CEOs anywhere close to what we pay them

Countries don't pay CEOs. Companies do.

Wow are you dumb.

No shit Sherlock

average-ceo-to-worker-pay-ratio-at-largest-listed-firms-2012_chartbuilder.png

has your anti corporate god obama done anything to fix that yet?
 
The risk to society of wealth inequity that gets too large is rather simple to explain.

What you get when that happens is THIS ECONOMY

explain why the wealth gap has grown as the country has become more liberal.

The country is far more conservative or on the moderate portion of the right side of the political spectrum. Obama is a moderate republican having increased drones, cut welfare, and allowed the insurance companies to dominate health care discussion! Dwight Eisenhower would be a moderate Democrat by today's standards! The world is liberal to you because you are so far right that you don't realize what has truly happened. You have shifted further to the right just as the rest of the country has. Americans are off the charts when it comes to politics and belief. We are super scared of terror (that we create), very fundamentalist (compare statistics between the US and any developed country, you'll find the US is way off the spectrum) and gun obsessed when no other country in the world worships guns like we do. This all makes us very right of the political spectrum, not liberal! We are fascist with our nationalism and exceptionalism.
 
Last edited:
Now you have me curious

Tell us about your free society

It's called a Constitutional Republic where government is limited to specific enumerated powers beyond which they cannot meddle.

Look into it sometime comrade.

Great nonanswer

How do you envision what a "free society" would look like? How does it operate? How is it funded?

Wow. You really are ignorant. Read the Constitution. The answers to your questions are right there in the document. Society operates just fine with a government limited to specific powers as the American experiment proved beyond a shadow of a doubt...despite constant attempts from central planners and collectivists to impose their will on all of us.
 
And the people who can do it used to get paid 20x the average worker, now it's more like 300x. They could find completely competent people to do the job for less.

You get to dictate how much a person negotiated for their own compensation when they have a rare skill??

Nice little totalitarian statist you are

No I'm arguing they can afford to pay workers more.

And you CAN jump off a bridge.. but nobody else, including the government, gets to force you to do it
 
It's called a Constitutional Republic where government is limited to specific enumerated powers beyond which they cannot meddle.

Look into it sometime comrade.

Great nonanswer

How do you envision what a "free society" would look like? How does it operate? How is it funded?

Wow. You really are ignorant. Read the Constitution. The answers to your questions are right there in the document. Society operates just fine with a government limited to specific powers as the American experiment proved beyond a shadow of a doubt...despite constant attempts from central planners and collectivists to impose their will on all of us.

:bang3:
 
I'm for the right sized government and the right amount of taxes

the top 5% are paying 40% of the income taxes, the bottom 50% are paying nothing. Is that "fair" ?

The top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, is that fair? They own, 90% of the wealth, seems to me, they should be paying 90% of the taxes.

Some people are born beautiful and others are born smart, while others are born dumb and ugly like you.

Is that fair?
 
Now you have me curious

Tell us about your free society

It's called a Constitutional Republic where government is limited to specific enumerated powers beyond which they cannot meddle.

Look into it sometime comrade.

Great nonanswer

How do you envision what a "free society" would look like? How does it operate? How is it funded?

A free society doesn't need to be "funded." A free society is where government leaves you alone. It costs the government nothing to leave you alone.
 
It's called a Constitutional Republic where government is limited to specific enumerated powers beyond which they cannot meddle.

Look into it sometime comrade.

Great nonanswer

How do you envision what a "free society" would look like? How does it operate? How is it funded?

A free society doesn't need to be "funded." A free society is where government leaves you alone. It costs the government nothing to leave you alone.

You are just so funny sometimes

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWINtUCshxY"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWINtUCshxY[/ame]
 
Last edited:
OK..lets look at it this way

U.S._Distribution_of_Wealth,_2007.jpg


40% of our population controls 2 TENTHS of a percent of our nations wealth. That is the population you are complaining so much about

5% of our population controls 61.9% of our wealth. That is the population you believe is oppressed

Must be nice to own most of the wealth and get a bunch of poor repubs to believe you are also the victim

Inequality in treatment by government knows no economic limit..

Funny how you and your ilk will scream for equality in treatment when it benefits you or your cause.. but scream for the inequality in treatment for others when it also benefits you or your cause

Again, what point are you making? I bet its just that I'm stupid right. Just quit typing one trick pony
 
So you think boards of directors choose to pay more for leadership teams than they need to...just 'cuz?

Wow. I'm guessing you have zero executive business experience. Am I right?

Yes it's a rigged game. I do have lots of experience actually.

Then by all means, explain to us in your own words why a board of directors would pay more for leadership than they need to, thereby hurting their own financial interests and creating a competitive disadvantage for the company they oversee.

The floor is yours...

That's a good question. You'd have to be pretty naive to think there aren't completely competent people who would work for much less. They all must be working together.
 
Do you know what an "income tax" is?

If the top 5% are collecting that much of our nations available income, you bet your ass that is fair

I asked if you think its fair that 50% pay no income tax, and in fact many have a negative income tax due to EIC.

What specific things would you do to take income from the top earners and GIVE it to the lower 50%?

raising taxes will do nothing but drive successful people out of this country, you fricken libtards are determined to punish the job creators, because of your insane jealousy of their success.

Why are the rich leaving California and New York? Any idea, Norton? Puniative taxation, thats why.

OK..lets look at it this way

U.S._Distribution_of_Wealth,_2007.jpg


40% of our population controls 2 TENTHS of a percent of our nations wealth. That is the population you are complaining so much about

5% of our population controls 61.9% of our wealth. That is the population you believe is oppressed

lets look at it this way, 47% of the country i on some for of entitlement. do they really figure on being in the top earning bracket? I know wealth redistributing libs would like to see that but it doesn't work that way. You don't work, you don't make a lot. thats a fact.
 
Do you know what an "income tax" is?

If the top 5% are collecting that much of our nations available income, you bet your ass that is fair

It's not the nation's income, nitwit. Income belongs to those who receive it. it doesn't belong to the government or "the nation."

Only to anarchists who still do not accept the fact that they are members of a society

If you want to belong to a collective, move to north korea. The USA is a free democratic republic, what I earn is mine, not everyone's
 
It's not the nation's income, nitwit. Income belongs to those who receive it. it doesn't belong to the government or "the nation."

Only to anarchists who still do not accept the fact that they are members of a society

If you want to belong to a collective, move to north korea. The USA is a free democratic republic, what I earn is mine, not everyone's

You are part of "We the People"

We the People function as part of something we like to call....The United States

You don't like it....try North Korea or Somalia
 
I asked if you think its fair that 50% pay no income tax, and in fact many have a negative income tax due to EIC.

What specific things would you do to take income from the top earners and GIVE it to the lower 50%?

raising taxes will do nothing but drive successful people out of this country, you fricken libtards are determined to punish the job creators, because of your insane jealousy of their success.

Why are the rich leaving California and New York? Any idea, Norton? Puniative taxation, thats why.

OK..lets look at it this way

U.S._Distribution_of_Wealth,_2007.jpg


40% of our population controls 2 TENTHS of a percent of our nations wealth. That is the population you are complaining so much about

5% of our population controls 61.9% of our wealth. That is the population you believe is oppressed

lets look at it this way, 47% of the country i on some for of entitlement. do they really figure on being in the top earning bracket? I know wealth redistributing libs would like to see that but it doesn't work that way. You don't work, you don't make a lot. thats a fact.

another thing the libs don't understand---wealth and income are not the same thing.

But I do think that some CEO pay is out of line when salary, bonus, stock grants and options, and other fringes like cars are considered.

The question then becomes: if CEO pay was limited would the difference be shared equally with every employee or would the shareholders get it as dividends?

None of this is ever as clear as fools like RW want to make it.
 

Forum List

Back
Top