This 6 minute video sums up the shocking facts of American wealth and inequality

What is wrong with me deciding for myself how much I'm willing to work for? So far, you only posited that it's wrong because the vast majority of other people don't think that way. Is being in the minority inherently wrong, in your view?

I think RKMBrown comes closest to answering this question honestly. Minimum wage is essentially government mandated unionism.

The minimum wage is a way to keep poor people poor so they continue to elect liberals to fix a problem created by liberals.

Hmmm... but isn't that the same thing?
 
What is wrong with me deciding for myself how much I'm willing to work for? So far, you only posited that it's wrong because the vast majority of other people don't think that way. Is being in the minority inherently wrong, in your view?

I think RKMBrown comes closest to answering this question honestly. Minimum wage is essentially government mandated unionism.

Thats a slight stretch. It may be an aspect unions mimic but its not government mandated unionism.
 
Nobody is arguing that the CEO should not be paid more. But CEOs in the 70s made about 30x that of the average worker. Now they make 300x more to do the same job. It doesn't take a genius to figure out something is wrong with that stat. Sorry but they aren't 10x more valuable to a company now.

I think you are getting hung on on the raw power of the numbers. I would agree that something is wrong with that stat. However, penalizing someone for pursuing the American dream is not the answer. If that stat is to be changed its incumbent on the person that seeks that same level of wealth to do what is necessary to gain the skill sets to accomplish that goal. Wealth by its very nature is not limited. Most people just don't know how to obtain it.

Well we first need to recognize there is a problem, then figure out how to fix it. Now that you agree something is wrong with the stat it's time to think about how to fix it.

I will "recognize that there's a problem" at the point that you or some other leftist actually PROVES, with demonstrable evidence, that there's a problem. Just shouting stats at me and saying, "Isn't it obvious that that's wrong?!" does not suffice.

By the way, simply saying, "Something's wrong with that" does NOT move you into "fix it" time. Aside from the fact that you haven't actually proven that something IS wrong, you also have not determined what that "something" is, so how do you propose to "think about how to fix" a problem you haven't even defined yet?

Why do leftists have so much trouble with linear thinking and logic?
 
If you are referring to the CEO who "earns" three-hundred times more than the average employee in his corporation as being one in pursuiit of the American Dream, please tell us in specific terms what you consider to be the long venerated "American Dream."

why do you have so much butt-hurt over CEO's money?
I didn't realize I was asking such a hard question to answer.

I'll bet Vox could say the same thing, so why can't you answer it?
 
What is wrong with me deciding for myself how much I'm willing to work for? So far, you only posited that it's wrong because the vast majority of other people don't think that way. Is being in the minority inherently wrong, in your view?

I think RKMBrown comes closest to answering this question honestly. Minimum wage is essentially government mandated unionism.

The minimum wage is a way to keep poor people poor so they continue to elect liberals to fix a problem created by liberals.

I have to disagree unless your saying the rate of minimum wage is an issue they can run on. Minimum wage in of itself is just a guarantee that if you work then you can realistically expect x amount of dollars for time spent working.
 
Income discrepancy is what you find in a banana republic. Look at Mexico with the richest man in the world, Carlos Slim.

Oh, okay, so the assumption is that something is wrong simply because it bears a surface resemblance to someplace you consider bad.

Wearing pants is also something you find in a banana republic (or a Banana Republic, depending on how you want to look at it). Does that surface comparison mean that wearing pants is a bad thing?
 
What is wrong with me deciding for myself how much I'm willing to work for? So far, you only posited that it's wrong because the vast majority of other people don't think that way. Is being in the minority inherently wrong, in your view?

I think RKMBrown comes closest to answering this question honestly. Minimum wage is essentially government mandated unionism.

Thats a slight stretch. It may be an aspect unions mimic but its not government mandated unionism.

How is it not? The whole point of unions is for workers to unite and demand more money and better working conditions. For that to happen, they have to 'bring the pain' to anyone who doesn't play along. Isn't that what minimum wage laws mandate - that people aren't allowed to undercut their fellow workers by accepting less than the majority deems 'minimal'?
 
Roughly the same amount the wealthiest Americans controlled during the decades between the 40s and 80s. You'll find specifics here:
It's the Inequality, Stupid | Mother Jones

oh, mother jones :lol:

you seriously think that the libtard source is going to be considered credible?

oh, the naivete of the young :D
Mother Jones really fucked up Romney's campaign with video.

Yeah, it did a really impressive job of convincing all of its readers not to vote for Romney. Because that was such a concern before that. :cuckoo:
 
I think RKMBrown comes closest to answering this question honestly. Minimum wage is essentially government mandated unionism.

The minimum wage is a way to keep poor people poor so they continue to elect liberals to fix a problem created by liberals.

I have to disagree unless your saying the rate of minimum wage is an issue they can run on. Minimum wage in of itself is just a guarantee that if you work then you can realistically expect x amount of dollars for time spent working.

It's more than that, because it effects whether you can work or not. What it's really saying is that if you can't earn at least the minimum, you're not allowed to work at all. That's not just 'twisting words' - that's the underlying reality of the situation, regardless of the rationalizations.
 
Last edited:
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz
Man......there are some people here who have dark, ugly hearts.

I am most impressed by the genius who expects people with no money to buy food ( in grain form ) in bulk for discounts. It is just wonderful logic. Arrogant fuck.

Were you not aware that Costco and Sam's Club both take food stamps?

are you aware that Sam's charges for a membership

So does Costco. So what? It's not a tough amount to come up with, especially if you do what a lot of poor folks I know do and club together to get one so you can all shop there. And it's absolutely worth it for the savings you end up getting.

But hey, if you think it's insurmountable to go to a little thought and effort in order to make your finances easier . . . you've just proven our point about leftists encouraging people to be lazy, stupid, and helpless, haven't you?
 
I think RKMBrown comes closest to answering this question honestly. Minimum wage is essentially government mandated unionism.

The minimum wage is a way to keep poor people poor so they continue to elect liberals to fix a problem created by liberals.

I have to disagree unless your saying the rate of minimum wage is an issue they can run on. Minimum wage in of itself is just a guarantee that if you work then you can realistically expect x amount of dollars for time spent working.

No, minimum wage is a guarantee that if you aren't worth an arbitrary amount assigned by arrogant liberal elitists that you can't get a job.
 
I wonder why all the countries that I wouldn't want to live in have really bad wealth inequality?
File:GINI retouched legend.gif - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Strangely enough those with less inequality also seem to have the happiest people.
Norway - In Photos: The World's Happiest And Saddest Countries - Forbes

Crime rates also seem to be higher where there is more inequality.
Crime Index by Country 2013

But I guess CEOs just work 10X harder than they did in the 70's and are earning what they are getting? No greed or crony capitalism here...

I wonder why so many of the countries I wouldn't want to live in think it's their government's job to produce wealth equality? Oh, yeah, because of a surplus of leftist boobs who think Wikipedia is a source.
 
Who the fuck cares? Nobody is equal, we all have different skills and abilities.

The USA became the world's #1 economy BECAUSE we let people have the freedom to try things for themselves while your Progressive economies are the worlds poorest and need armed guards to keep running and walls to keep the sane and productive from fleeing

I am not suggesting we become equal. I am okay with the idea of a CEO making much more money than a low level employee. However, these stats are insane. This is NOT how it should be. The middle class is shrinking. That is a problem.

Now see, here's your mistake. You're trying to argue nuance. Most of the conservatives on this site (probably in the world) are too fucking stupid to divide any issue into more than black and white. Shades of gray require thought. Know your audience.

Nuance and shades of gray, huh? You mean like "The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer"? "Just look at these stats. There's obviously a problem, because it looks WRONG to me!"? "CEOs make too much!"? Exactly which "nuance" and "shades of gray" do you propose we emulate?

Personally, I'm just trying to get SOMEONE to show me proof that there's a problem other than just telling me how "obvious" it is to THEM.
 
I think RKMBrown comes closest to answering this question honestly. Minimum wage is essentially government mandated unionism.

Thats a slight stretch. It may be an aspect unions mimic but its not government mandated unionism.

How is it not? The whole point of unions is for workers to unite and demand more money and better working conditions. For that to happen, they have to 'bring the pain' to anyone who doesn't play along. Isn't that what minimum wage laws mandate - that people aren't allowed to undercut their fellow workers by accepting less than the majority deems 'minimal'?

Like I said its only an aspect that unions mimic. Unions do a lot more than just set a wage.
 
Now see, here's your mistake. You're trying to argue nuance. Most of the conservatives on this site (probably in the world) are too fucking stupid to divide any issue into more than black and white. Shades of gray require thought. Know your audience.

Oh tell me about it. It's amazing how many conservatives lack basic critical thinking skills. It really keeps them from fully understanding most political topics.

Yeah, it seems futile to try to convince them of anything. I still sometimes try because I think it's important to the state of the country and the world but I'm not very hopeful that anything will come of it.

Wait! YOU are trying to convince someone of something?! What might that be, aside from the fact that you're a dimwit and an asshole who's aspiring to condescension he hasn't earned? :eusa_eh:
 
The minimum wage is a way to keep poor people poor so they continue to elect liberals to fix a problem created by liberals.

I have to disagree unless your saying the rate of minimum wage is an issue they can run on. Minimum wage in of itself is just a guarantee that if you work then you can realistically expect x amount of dollars for time spent working.

No, minimum wage is a guarantee that if you aren't worth an arbitrary amount assigned by arrogant liberal elitists that you can't get a job.


No. Since most people have the skills to get a minimum wage job just by being able to breath i would have to say its not that dark of a conspiracy meant to keep poor people down.
 
Then tell me why every conservative argument comes down to one of two polar opposites.

You mean working solutions vs. non-working solutions?

No, that's not what I mean at all. Look at the last couple of pages. A suggestion is made that wealth inequality is bad for society. The response is 'socialism is bad'. Ugh, it doesn't get too much more simpleminded than that.

The problem is that you don't see that BOTH segments of that are simplistic. "Wealth inequality is bad" is every bit as simplistic as "Socialism is bad". However, "socialism is bad" has two points in its favor that the first statement doesn't: first, it's a response rather than an opener, and so is allowed to be just as simplistic as the statement it responds to; second, it's easily demonstrated to be true by evidence. The first statement presumably is not, since I keep asking for that evidence, and have yet to receive it.
 
No, that's not what I mean at all. Look at the last couple of pages. A suggestion is made that wealth inequality is bad for society. The response is 'socialism is bad'. Ugh, it doesn't get too much more simpleminded than that.

As I explained. Wealth inequality is a stupid concept. If everyone in this country was a millionaire and 1% were billionaires we would still have wealth inequality by three orders of magnitude. It is a stupid phrase for stupid people who get emotional over stupid statistics.

Your argument neglects the fact that in a finite world, everyone being a millionaire is not a possibility.

YOUR argument neglects the fact that we don't live in a finite world.
 

Forum List

Back
Top