Top 8% Own 85%

[gipper]

when they misunderstood them you insulted them and called them crony capitalists instead of just saying, hold on, that wasn't my poin

I called no one a crony capitalist and I insulted no one, but you

What a dumb ass. Here's where you did both. And it's where I entered the conversation

and you don't think that if you had your left wing regressive system that the same thing wouldn't happen....

I guess suggesting we terminate the cozy relation between big government and big business causes some righties to get all pissy

I have never used the ignore function....until now.

 

[kaz]

when they misunderstood them you insulted them and called them crony capitalists instead of just saying, hold on, that wasn't my poin

I called no one a crony capitalist and I insulted no one, but you

What a dumb ass. Here's where you did both. And it's where I entered the conversation

and you don't think that if you had your left wing regressive system that the same thing wouldn't happen....

I guess suggesting we terminate the cozy relation between big government and big business causes some righties to get all pissy

You accused me of calling a poster a crony capitalist and you offer as proof this post. Only the post does no such thing.

That's the definition of a crony capitalist. OMG, you're on the Internet, you can just google words you don't know ...

 

[kaz]

when they misunderstood them you insulted them and called them crony capitalists instead of just saying, hold on, that wasn't my poin

I called no one a crony capitalist and I insulted no one, but you

What a dumb ass. Here's where you did both. And it's where I entered the conversation

and you don't think that if you had your left wing regressive system that the same thing wouldn't happen....

I guess suggesting we terminate the cozy relation between big government and big business causes some righties to get all pissy

I have never used the ignore function....until now.

Thanks! My backing up and disproving your ridiculous denial was too much huh, I understand

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Correlation not causation

So you want to ignore the actual results of a decline in unions and stick to your false claims. I see.

The results are the results you have not proven that lower union membership is the cause

Union jobs pay more. Look at teachers or auto workers. Sorry you choose to be blind to the obvious.

Sure they pay more. That's what happens when you FORCE people to dish out money they want. But who ultimately ends up paying these wages?

I know exactly what unions in the automotive industry are about, that's why I drive a Toyota today and have the last ten years.

Never been happier. I can't even think of my mechanics name anymore. My Toyota has never left me stranded nor made me late for work that my last American made car was renown for. After 30,000 miles, my mechanic drove it more than I did.

My former mechanic was the person that gave me the tip. He explained how in the American auto industry, companies are forced to pay ridiculous wages and benefits whereas the Japanese put their money into quality engineering and parts. That's why they can give you a 100,000 mile seven year bumper-to-bumper warranty.

Yes the execs of US companies made a lot of bad decisions and made bad cars. That has nothing to do with Unions.

Sure it does, because in order for an American car company to stay competitive, they have to offer products at a reasonable or competitive price.

If much of the cost of the product goes to labor and benefits, then they have to cut somewhere in order to bring down the price of their product to compete with others. So they cut quality because they can't cut pay or benefits thanks to unions.

So you buy an American car, and before it hits 50,000 miles, it starts having all kinds of problems. Why? Because the parts and engineering are so cheap.

Trust me, I've delivered to many automotive plants in my time, and it's amazing any work gets done at all. In fact we don't even accept deliveries to automotive plants anymore because of all the problems with lazy union workers. It takes forever to get unloaded at these places.

 

[kaz]

So you want to ignore the actual results of a decline in unions and stick to your false claims. I see.

The results are the results you have not proven that lower union membership is the cause

Union jobs pay more. Look at teachers or auto workers. Sorry you choose to be blind to the obvious.

Sure they pay more. That's what happens when you FORCE people to dish out money they want. But who ultimately ends up paying these wages?

I know exactly what unions in the automotive industry are about, that's why I drive a Toyota today and have the last ten years.

Never been happier. I can't even think of my mechanics name anymore. My Toyota has never left me stranded nor made me late for work that my last American made car was renown for. After 30,000 miles, my mechanic drove it more than I did.

My former mechanic was the person that gave me the tip. He explained how in the American auto industry, companies are forced to pay ridiculous wages and benefits whereas the Japanese put their money into quality engineering and parts. That's why they can give you a 100,000 mile seven year bumper-to-bumper warranty.

Yes the execs of US companies made a lot of bad decisions and made bad cars. That has nothing to do with Unions.

Sure it does, because in order for an American car company to stay competitive, they have to offer products at a reasonable or competitive price.

If much of the cost of the product goes to labor and benefits, then they have to cut somewhere in order to bring down the price of their product to compete with others. So they cut quality because they can't cut pay or benefits thanks to unions.

So you buy an American car, and before it hits 50,000 miles, it starts having all kinds of problems. Why? Because the parts and engineering are so cheap.

Trust me, I've delivered to many automotive plants in my time, and it's amazing any work gets done at all. In fact we don't even accept deliveries to automotive plants anymore because of all the problems with lazy union workers. It takes forever to get unloaded at these places.

I never know which is more amazing. The incredible detail you need to break down the obvious to liberals, or that they still don't get it when you do

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So you think we should double down on stupid?

The only way to put an end to income inequality is to impose socialism...is that right?

That a joke right?
I have visited many Socialist countries. The ONE common denominator is there is always a super rich elite class in the background making their billions off the idiots who know what's happening but cling to the Utopian myth that if only they could change the current government all the endemic corruption will stop.

Not a joke actually, but socialism would be the EXACT wrong thing to do. I was responding to bripat. He assumed I was promoting socialism when I posted this thread. Not sure why anyone would assume that, but he and others in this thread did so.

Some on the left think greater government control or socialism is the answer. Some on the right think anyone who criticizes the current state, wants socialism.

Probably because you can only have Socialism or Capitalism.

You either want government to take money away from the people that earn it to give to others, or you believe that people should rightly keep what they earn. You really can't have both.

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The results are the results you have not proven that lower union membership is the cause

Union jobs pay more. Look at teachers or auto workers. Sorry you choose to be blind to the obvious.

Sure they pay more. That's what happens when you FORCE people to dish out money they want. But who ultimately ends up paying these wages?

I know exactly what unions in the automotive industry are about, that's why I drive a Toyota today and have the last ten years.

Never been happier. I can't even think of my mechanics name anymore. My Toyota has never left me stranded nor made me late for work that my last American made car was renown for. After 30,000 miles, my mechanic drove it more than I did.

My former mechanic was the person that gave me the tip. He explained how in the American auto industry, companies are forced to pay ridiculous wages and benefits whereas the Japanese put their money into quality engineering and parts. That's why they can give you a 100,000 mile seven year bumper-to-bumper warranty.

Yes the execs of US companies made a lot of bad decisions and made bad cars. That has nothing to do with Unions.

Sure it does, because in order for an American car company to stay competitive, they have to offer products at a reasonable or competitive price.

If much of the cost of the product goes to labor and benefits, then they have to cut somewhere in order to bring down the price of their product to compete with others. So they cut quality because they can't cut pay or benefits thanks to unions.

So you buy an American car, and before it hits 50,000 miles, it starts having all kinds of problems. Why? Because the parts and engineering are so cheap.

Trust me, I've delivered to many automotive plants in my time, and it's amazing any work gets done at all. In fact we don't even accept deliveries to automotive plants anymore because of all the problems with lazy union workers. It takes forever to get unloaded at these places.

I never know which is more amazing. The incredible detail you need to break down the obvious to liberals, or that they still don't get it when you do

They live in their own little world. That's why when these politicians tell them they will provide something for free, they never think about how it's actually going to be paid for; as if people will work for free to give them things.

They refuse to believe in the philosophy of action/ reaction. They believe that when you take action against somebody, they are just going to sit there put up with it.

But no matter what the subject, money has to come from somewhere. If you promise union workers a very generous pension and lifetime medical coverage, somebody has to pay for that, and that somebody is the consumer. If you increase minimum wage, somebody has to pay for that increase, and that's usually the job of another worker or again, the consumer. If you promise free college, somebody has to pay for that college.

 

[gipper]

The only way to put an end to income inequality is to impose socialism...is that right?

That a joke right?
I have visited many Socialist countries. The ONE common denominator is there is always a super rich elite class in the background making their billions off the idiots who know what's happening but cling to the Utopian myth that if only they could change the current government all the endemic corruption will stop.

Not a joke actually, but socialism would be the EXACT wrong thing to do. I was responding to bripat. He assumed I was promoting socialism when I posted this thread. Not sure why anyone would assume that, but he and others in this thread did so.

Some on the left think greater government control or socialism is the answer. Some on the right think anyone who criticizes the current state, wants socialism.

Probably because you can only have Socialism or Capitalism.

You either want government to take money away from the people that earn it to give to others, or you believe that people should rightly keep what they earn. You really can't have both.

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

 

[kaz]

That a joke right?
I have visited many Socialist countries. The ONE common denominator is there is always a super rich elite class in the background making their billions off the idiots who know what's happening but cling to the Utopian myth that if only they could change the current government all the endemic corruption will stop.

Not a joke actually, but socialism would be the EXACT wrong thing to do. I was responding to bripat. He assumed I was promoting socialism when I posted this thread. Not sure why anyone would assume that, but he and others in this thread did so.

Some on the left think greater government control or socialism is the answer. Some on the right think anyone who criticizes the current state, wants socialism.

Probably because you can only have Socialism or Capitalism.

You either want government to take money away from the people that earn it to give to others, or you believe that people should rightly keep what they earn. You really can't have both.

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

This is all I told you, Holmes. People didn't get what you said. I was just trying to point that out to you. And that you didn't give us a chance since you pointed out the wealth distribution without making your point.

Well, that and that you wanted people to recognize your history while you weren't giving them recognition for the same in reverse

 

[Brain357]

The only way to put an end to income inequality is to impose socialism...is that right?

That a joke right?
I have visited many Socialist countries. The ONE common denominator is there is always a super rich elite class in the background making their billions off the idiots who know what's happening but cling to the Utopian myth that if only they could change the current government all the endemic corruption will stop.

Not a joke actually, but socialism would be the EXACT wrong thing to do. I was responding to bripat. He assumed I was promoting socialism when I posted this thread. Not sure why anyone would assume that, but he and others in this thread did so.

Some on the left think greater government control or socialism is the answer. Some on the right think anyone who criticizes the current state, wants socialism.

Probably because you can only have Socialism or Capitalism.

You either want government to take money away from the people that earn it to give to others, or you believe that people should rightly keep what they earn. You really can't have both.

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Are the rich supposed to collude to pay workers less like the examples I have shown? That isn't good capitalism.

 

[Brain357]

So you want to ignore the actual results of a decline in unions and stick to your false claims. I see.

The results are the results you have not proven that lower union membership is the cause

Union jobs pay more. Look at teachers or auto workers. Sorry you choose to be blind to the obvious.

Sure they pay more. That's what happens when you FORCE people to dish out money they want. But who ultimately ends up paying these wages?

I know exactly what unions in the automotive industry are about, that's why I drive a Toyota today and have the last ten years.

Never been happier. I can't even think of my mechanics name anymore. My Toyota has never left me stranded nor made me late for work that my last American made car was renown for. After 30,000 miles, my mechanic drove it more than I did.

My former mechanic was the person that gave me the tip. He explained how in the American auto industry, companies are forced to pay ridiculous wages and benefits whereas the Japanese put their money into quality engineering and parts. That's why they can give you a 100,000 mile seven year bumper-to-bumper warranty.

Yes the execs of US companies made a lot of bad decisions and made bad cars. That has nothing to do with Unions.

Sure it does, because in order for an American car company to stay competitive, they have to offer products at a reasonable or competitive price.

If much of the cost of the product goes to labor and benefits, then they have to cut somewhere in order to bring down the price of their product to compete with others. So they cut quality because they can't cut pay or benefits thanks to unions.

So you buy an American car, and before it hits 50,000 miles, it starts having all kinds of problems. Why? Because the parts and engineering are so cheap.

Trust me, I've delivered to many automotive plants in my time, and it's amazing any work gets done at all. In fact we don't even accept deliveries to automotive plants anymore because of all the problems with lazy union workers. It takes forever to get unloaded at these places.

They can stay competitive and produce a good product. In Germany auto workers make a lot more than here.

 

[BluesLegend]

That a joke right?
I have visited many Socialist countries. The ONE common denominator is there is always a super rich elite class in the background making their billions off the idiots who know what's happening but cling to the Utopian myth that if only they could change the current government all the endemic corruption will stop.

Not a joke actually, but socialism would be the EXACT wrong thing to do. I was responding to bripat. He assumed I was promoting socialism when I posted this thread. Not sure why anyone would assume that, but he and others in this thread did so.

Some on the left think greater government control or socialism is the answer. Some on the right think anyone who criticizes the current state, wants socialism.

Probably because you can only have Socialism or Capitalism.

You either want government to take money away from the people that earn it to give to others, or you believe that people should rightly keep what they earn. You really can't have both.

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

If I shared my 8% wealth you people would just piss it away on drugs and stupid crap and be broke again in months.

 

[Pop23]

I've never quite figured out how someone making more money then me can diminish my happiness?

Maybe it's just me?

Yeah, it is just you. Myopia does that, try to see panoptically.

No, actually the well adjusted can live happily without being overly wealthy.

I'm sorry, my comment wasn't to question your wealth or happiness - even a homeless person living in a tent can be happy. Focus on the word Panoptic, that is, permitting the viewing of all parts or elements of an issue. We can't assume the 92% are all happy with such an outcome.

Why would someone even care why someone else is rich?

I don't get it

Paranoia? Jealousy?

What?

Lack of self esteem

Apparently so

I gave three steps that cures the problem.

But in one of those it means that liberal wealthy would have to stop being hypocrites and pony up the taxes THEY SAY THEY DON'T pay enough of.......

And the other two involve the left admit they, and their ideas have failed and caused much of the problem to begin with.

From what I can see, progressives like to create problems, but can't solve the problems they created in the first place.

 

[Pop23]

Not a joke actually, but socialism would be the EXACT wrong thing to do. I was responding to bripat. He assumed I was promoting socialism when I posted this thread. Not sure why anyone would assume that, but he and others in this thread did so.

Some on the left think greater government control or socialism is the answer. Some on the right think anyone who criticizes the current state, wants socialism.

Probably because you can only have Socialism or Capitalism.

You either want government to take money away from the people that earn it to give to others, or you believe that people should rightly keep what they earn. You really can't have both.

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

If I shared my 8% wealth you people would just piss it away on drugs and stupid crap and be broke again in months.

Even so, I'm willing to be the test subject

Bring it

 

[BluesLegend]

Probably because you can only have Socialism or Capitalism.

You either want government to take money away from the people that earn it to give to others, or you believe that people should rightly keep what they earn. You really can't have both.

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

If I shared my 8% wealth you people would just piss it away on drugs and stupid crap and be broke again in months.

Even so, I'm willing to be the test subject

Bring it

Turn off your computer, get out in the real world and hustle up some wealth for yourself.

 

[Pop23]

You missed my point entirely. As a libertarian bordering on an anarchist, I want government out of our lives entirely. So...how anyone in this thread concludes I want government to take people's income merely because I am pointing out the horrendous income inequality that exists today, are absurd and mistaken.

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

If I shared my 8% wealth you people would just piss it away on drugs and stupid crap and be broke again in months.

Even so, I'm willing to be the test subject

Bring it

Turn off your computer, get out in the real world and hustle up some wealth for yourself.

Dude, I'm on your side.

I just wanted your cash

 

[BluesLegend]

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

If I shared my 8% wealth you people would just piss it away on drugs and stupid crap and be broke again in months.

Even so, I'm willing to be the test subject

Bring it

Turn off your computer, get out in the real world and hustle up some wealth for yourself.

Dude, I'm on your side.

I just wanted your cash

Sorry I'm a greedy wealth hoarding 8 percenter meanie.

 

[WelfareQueen]

This is really screwed up...and we Americans fight among ourselves over stupid things. All the while the elites are screwing us. When will we wake up and take action?


The Panama Papers offer damning proof of this: increasing concentrations of wealth and power that are free of any constraint (such as taxes) is not just the consequence of centralized money and state power--this inequality is the only possible output of centralized money and state power.

Here is a graphic portrayal of just how concentrated global wealth really is: the top .7% (less than 1%) own 45% of all global wealth, and the top 8% own 85%.

Of Two Minds - The Panama Papers: This Is the Consequence of Centralized Money and Power

How dare they be successful!!!!

You completely missed the point of the thread...but you are not alone. Many others responded similarly, which is rather sad. Many on the right seem to have an automatic reflex when anyone exposes the fraud that is our economic system.

Our economic system has raised more people out of poverty around the world than any other economic system in human history. Why are people on the left so fucking ignorant?

Question: Name any economic system better than ours? Go ahead...I'm sure we'll all be waiting with baited breath.

 

[Pop23]

Here we go again.

I have no problem with capitalism or with some people making more than others.

Apparently you have no problem with a rigged system where favored people make millions and billions more than others thanks to fraud and corruption. You seem to like the fact that 8% have 85%, which clearly indicates fraud and corruption.

Why do you like fraud and corruption by government and big business?

If I shared my 8% wealth you people would just piss it away on drugs and stupid crap and be broke again in months.

Even so, I'm willing to be the test subject

Bring it

Turn off your computer, get out in the real world and hustle up some wealth for yourself.

Dude, I'm on your side.

I just wanted your cash

Sorry I'm a greedy wealth hoarding 8 percenter meanie.

Good for you

I'll be waiting for that Fed Ex package full of cash anyway

A full report on how I piss it away will come in a few days

 

[BluesLegend]

If I shared my 8% wealth you people would just piss it away on drugs and stupid crap and be broke again in months.

Even so, I'm willing to be the test subject

Bring it

Turn off your computer, get out in the real world and hustle up some wealth for yourself.

Dude, I'm on your side.

I just wanted your cash

Sorry I'm a greedy wealth hoarding 8 percenter meanie.

Good for you

I'll be waiting for that Fed Ex package full of cash anyway

A full report on how I piss it away will come in a few days

But seriously, I give almost 10% of my earnings away every month but I personally direct where it goes vs trusting government or some corrupt charity to allocate the money. Most recently I purchased and donated some expensive equipment to a school that competes in robot building competitions.