Unequal distribution of wealth

[thereisnospoon]

yeah, the sweat equity of trust funds, corporate profits, accumulation of wealth through financial instruments like the ones that brought the world economies to their knees?

It is what it is, man. Who are we as a society to label it an accident of birth, and try to hijack it.

Most all philosophy has debated this. Read what the founding fathers read about societal obligations. Equality and fairness were major themes then and are now. A society without either is bound to collapse sooner than later.

yes equality under the law

They said nothing about "equality of outcome".

 

[Cecilie1200]

Do not tell me you can't find a job. What you can't find is a job you WANT. Boo-freaking-hoo. My heart bleeds for you.

You honestly think there's no one out there that can't find a job or are you referring to someone who somehow can't find anything after 99 months?

Actually, I know a few people who can't find a job. Know why? Because they didn't do the bare minimum to make them qualified for anything.

I'm still not overwhelmed with sympathy.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Really? STILL blaming GWB? I mean, in 2007, Dems held House and Senate. Dems pushed the Fannie/Freddie housing meltdown scheme the last 2 decades. Just sayin....lets put blame where it's due. .

Yeah, the poster was blaming Bush where it is due.

New Prosperity Initiative
April 11, 2000

“I propose a New Prosperity Initiative…A plan to
help remove obstacles on the road to the middle class…
Instead of helping people cope with their need, we will
help them to move beyond it. With the same energy and
activism that others have brought to expanding government,
we must expand opportunity.” George W. Bush

4-11-2000. Wasn't Clinton president then?

And Bush's plans kinda got sidetracked with that pesky "Man made disaster" on 9-11-2001. As much as you guys hate it, folks on the right actually fight back against violence, so we got a bit busy for a while there.

To all the Blame Bush-tards.....as Bush in office on 11/12/2010?

 

[Flaylo]

I'd like to know why the unequal distribution of wealth is a bad thing. This seems to be a major premise from those on the left, but it's like you just assume it's a bad thing without every really providing evidence or justifying the premise.

Why do you support unequal distribution of wealth dumbass? If unequal distribution of wealth continues to soar a country's economy will fail and people who don't have the money will continue to "borrow" money on credit. Unequal distribution doesn't doing anything good for supply side economics.

 

[Flaylo]

Why do the rich have their eye on someone's piece of the pie? Why should the rich be able to steal worker's wages and benefits?

Sharing is something you do voluntarily. When the rich take wages and benefits of the poor workers that is stealing from their pie.

How are they stealing wages and benefits?

Didn't you know? All rich people are inherently evil and one can only become rich by fucking over poor people and stealing from them. Of course, what poor people have worth stealing is always the question that throws ME.

Nobody facking said that all rich people are inherently anything but your dumbass has went on record as saying that all poor people and people without jobs are inherently lazy, jealous and not trying hard enough to get a job. You like to change the subject to argue a facking strawman argument.

 

[mdn2000]

I have said this before and lets see if it sticks

Its not redistribution of wealth that we are upset about. Its the disparity of wealth.

Wages have been stagnants for 30 years. In that time, the dollar has weaken and our purchasing power as a nation has decreased. Why do we have a thriving stock market on wall street yet go across the river and people in Newark have to wonder if they will have a good paying jobs.

We see all of our blue coller jobs leaving the country and what are we left with to be solid middle class? Join the Army (rely on the government) or go to college. Well every year tuition goes up. So people aren't making more money but the rates to get an education are. Plus the Bachelors degree is turning into the high school diploma of 40 years ago and I see many of the kids I graduated with getting a masters just to be competitive in this job market. Is the Master's degree going to be the new high school diploma? Then is our educational system actually legitimate because we let it everyone because we have to?

There is no social mobility. Its extremely tough to even get upper middle class. We are asking for a living wage for all as the minimum. We ask for good paying jobs because if we have more money, we buy more things, meaning more survival of TRUE small businesses instead of being outpriced by Wal-mart. Corporations are a form of slavery too. We must emancipate ourselves from the grips of the rich and demand we get paid a fair wage. We deserve to all have economic prosperity and Big Business keeps shrinking our wages year after year while they get rich.

The American Dream was for Immigrants to come here with no education but able to provide and thrive with their families, where kids could have a high school education and be just fine. Nowadays its unattainable in its impossible to live comfortably without a bachelors degree or more. If you don't have an education, don't come here because you would be worse off. We need to build again. We need to invest in America not India or China because its the right thing to do.

I agree with everything and only to a degree do I believe your correct about corporations. A fair wage, that is relevant to the price of goods, homes, stuff like that. Why not demand cheap housing, a home should be the easiest thing to buy, especially in big cities, there should be an endless selection available to those who graduate, no matter the level of education attained. Owning a home should be cheaper than buying a car. Which is needed more, which can you live without.

Corporations, huge, massive corporations built this country, small business thrive around large corporations. The endless propaganda, small business the foundation of the economy is bullshit. We are to believe the lost of our heavy industry, our chemical industry, our energy industry, our automotive industry, our textile industry, our paper industry, our electronics industry, the lost of all these industries does not effect our economy or the creation of small business.

We need large corporations, if we listen to the politicians all we need is more education and a small business. Pure bullshit. From Republicans and Democrats.

 

[antagon]

Anyone who needs 99 months to find any job is not serious about working.

there are tens of thousands of jobs out there. there are millions of unemployed. while i've not had any issues with unemployment in my life and dont anticipate that i ever will, i can appreciate that the job market is always smaller than the labor market. the job market involves between 50-60% of americans, the rest of us are unemployed by choice or otherwise. there's certainly not enough jobs for us all to snatch up if we all wanted to.

in a shit economy like the one we are in, the job market's capacity shrinks further, and people cant get jobs. i'm generally impressed by americans, but at the same time, some of us are more impressive than others.

is it wise or intelligent to presume as you have, or is there wisdom in recognizing that a shrunken job market will always under-utilize those of us who are least competitive?

 

[mudwhistle]

Wealth does not create jobs. Spending does. When companies spend they create jobs. When rich people accumulate wealth, jobs are not created.


Under the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest (unpaid for cuts) America did not get more job creation.

Tax Returns: A Comprehensive Assessment of the Bush Administration's Record on Cutting Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Why is it the "wealthys" problem to create jobs? And you don't think the wealthy spend money?

I get the feeling the leftist liver-eaters on this board think that rich people hoard all their money in their mattresses.

Most likely their off-shore hedge-funds.

Wonder why the left likes George Soros so much.

Well that is a rhetorical question. Of course I know....he's their friggen Santa Claus.

 

[editec]

Study to the world's leading shitholes.

The one thing they all have in common is massive inequitities in wealth distribution.

Every banana republic in the world has that one single economic indicator.

I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about what that means or if it is significant.

Some of you are grown-ups who are also clearly reality-based thinkers.

Some of you can or have read your history.

Income and wealth distribution is an important indicator of economic health of a nation.

Now either it is a leading indicator or a it residual artifact of the economy, but one thing that will strike you if you look at nations with this state of affairs, or at the history of nations havng been in that state, is the people do badly, the governments are repressive and the nation is unstable politically.

Of course AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALIST thinkers might want to dismiss this fact as relevent to every nation but ours.

And while I hope they're right, but nothing I can find in history leads me to think they are right.

 

[mudwhistle]

Go to the world leading shitholes.

The one thing they all have in common is massive inequitities in wealth distribution.

Every banana republic in the world has that one single economic indicator.

I leave you to draw your own conclusions about what that means or if it is significant.

Some of you are grown-ups who are also reality based thinkers.

Some of you can or have read your history.

Income and wealth distribution is an important indicator of economic health of a nation.

Now ehter it is a leading indicator or a residual artifact of the economy, one thing that will strike you if you looks at nations with this state of affairs or history havung been in that state is the people do badly, the governments are repressive and the nation is unstable politically.

Of course AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALIST thinkers might want to dismiss this fact as relevent to every nation but ours.

And while I hope they're right, nothing leads me to think they are right.

It works as long as pure Socialists are in charge. Problem is we have Communists masquerading as Socialists in Washington...and it seems that the disparity between the rich and the poor grows in Communist countries.

 

[antagon]

Study to the world's leading shitholes.

The one thing they all have in common is massive inequitities in wealth distribution.

Every banana republic in the world has that one single economic indicator.

I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about what that means or if it is significant.

Some of you are grown-ups who are also clearly reality-based thinkers.

Some of you can or have read your history.

Income and wealth distribution is an important indicator of economic health of a nation.

Now either it is a leading indicator or a it residual artifact of the economy, but one thing that will strike you if you look at nations with this state of affairs, or at the history of nations havng been in that state, is the people do badly, the governments are repressive and the nation is unstable politically.

Of course AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALIST thinkers might want to dismiss this fact as relevent to every nation but ours.

And while I hope they're right, but nothing I can find in history leads me to think they are right.

proud american exceptionalist, here...

the shithole shoe does not fit our economy because i feel that the disparity of wealth here is due to higher earning among a larger group of individuals, rather than abject poverty among a wide swathe of our populace such as is the case in bangladesh. to wit: where's the pervasive abject poverty in the US? our 'poor' are fat. our 'poor' are lower middle class living by a middle-class or better standards in shitbox nations. size 9 boot, size 13 american foot.

 

[Gadawg73]

Anyone who needs 99 months to find any job is not serious about working.

Very true. When my dad became ill and started his long downward slide toward dying, my mom and I did every job we could lay our hands on to keep ourselves fed and a roof over our heads. My mom cleaned houses and motel rooms and did maintenance on the piece-of-shit apartment complex we lived in. I remember her up on the roof, tarring it in the hot sun to patch leaks before the rainy season started. I cleaned kennels at a veterinary clinic and detailed the landlord's car after coming home from school. Desperately poor? You betcha, but we by God were employed and not homeless. And gradually, eventually, we got ourselves to a place where my mom has a nice, comfortable house and car for her retirement and I have a happy, successful family with a paid-off home and a new business of my own.

Do not tell me you can't find a job. What you can't find is a job you WANT. Boo-freaking-hoo. My heart bleeds for you.

In 1979 I bought my first home at age 23. Lower income transition neighborhood, white flight. I wasin college, worked at a clothing store at night and weekends about 20 hours a week and at a law firm as gopher about 20 hours a week and mowed grass and did yard work about 4-6 hours a week. I also studied and did the work around my newly purchased home in the "spare" time I had. In 1983 I moved from there and built my own home on 12 acres.
I also have a paid off home, since I was age 37.

 

[Nosmo King]

Wealth does not create jobs. Spending does. When companies spend they create jobs. When rich people accumulate wealth, jobs are not created.


Under the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest (unpaid for cuts) America did not get more job creation.

Tax Returns: A Comprehensive Assessment of the Bush Administration's Record on Cutting Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Why is it the "wealthys" problem to create jobs? And you don't think the wealthy spend money?

The reason we're given to cut their taxes and coddle them is because they are the job creators! Now you want to let them off the hook for that too?

So, in the end, to combat the deficit the only sacrifices must be made by those least capable of sacrificing. The rich got theirs and should bear no burden.

Great! Sell that in an unemployment line!

 

[The Rabbi]

Wealth does not create jobs. Spending does. When companies spend they create jobs. When rich people accumulate wealth, jobs are not created.


Under the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest (unpaid for cuts) America did not get more job creation.

Tax Returns: A Comprehensive Assessment of the Bush Administration's Record on Cutting Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Why is it the "wealthys" problem to create jobs? And you don't think the wealthy spend money?

The reason we're given to cut their taxes and coddle them is because they are the job creators! Now you want to let them off the hook for that too?

So, in the end, to combat the deficit the only sacrifices must be made by those least capable of sacrificing. The rich got theirs and should bear no burden.

Great! Sell that in an unemployment line!

Why do the wealthy have a responsibility at all that middle class or working class people dont?
This is the mindset of the Left: anyone with money MUST do such and such. Newsflash: No, they don't.
No one is "coddling" the wealthy. They pay plenty in taxes. About 80%, well out of all proportion to their numbers. And they are the constant target of redistributionist pukes like you telling them what they can and cannot do with their money.

 

[Nosmo King]

Why is it the "wealthys" problem to create jobs? And you don't think the wealthy spend money?

The reason we're given to cut their taxes and coddle them is because they are the job creators! Now you want to let them off the hook for that too?

So, in the end, to combat the deficit the only sacrifices must be made by those least capable of sacrificing. The rich got theirs and should bear no burden.

Great! Sell that in an unemployment line!

Why do the wealthy have a responsibility at all that middle class or working class people dont?
This is the mindset of the Left: anyone with money MUST do such and such. Newsflash: No, they don't.
No one is "coddling" the wealthy. They pay plenty in taxes. About 80%, well out of all proportion to their numbers. And they are the constant target of redistributionist pukes like you telling them what they can and cannot do with their money.

What's the mantra of the Right? Ever get a job from a poor person?

The wealthy are supposed to be the creators of jobs. That's what all the Conservatives have been telling us all these years.

Are there no responsibilities required to live in a society?

Or would Conservatives like to see where the greed road leads?

poor students of history, them Cons!

 

[rightwinger]

Anyone who needs 99 months to find any job is not serious about working.

Very true. When my dad became ill and started his long downward slide toward dying, my mom and I did every job we could lay our hands on to keep ourselves fed and a roof over our heads. My mom cleaned houses and motel rooms and did maintenance on the piece-of-shit apartment complex we lived in. I remember her up on the roof, tarring it in the hot sun to patch leaks before the rainy season started. I cleaned kennels at a veterinary clinic and detailed the landlord's car after coming home from school. Desperately poor? You betcha, but we by God were employed and not homeless. And gradually, eventually, we got ourselves to a place where my mom has a nice, comfortable house and car for her retirement and I have a happy, successful family with a paid-off home and a new business of my own.

Do not tell me you can't find a job. What you can't find is a job you WANT. Boo-freaking-hoo. My heart bleeds for you.

In 1979 I bought my first home at age 23. Lower income transition neighborhood, white flight. I wasin college, worked at a clothing store at night and weekends about 20 hours a week and at a law firm as gopher about 20 hours a week and mowed grass and did yard work about 4-6 hours a week. I also studied and did the work around my newly purchased home in the "spare" time I had. In 1983 I moved from there and built my own home on 12 acres.
I also have a paid off home, since I was age 37.

Tough to do that now. Housing prices are up while minimum wage does not buy what it did back then

 

[editec]

Go to the world leading shitholes.

The one thing they all have in common is massive inequitities in wealth distribution.

Every banana republic in the world has that one single economic indicator.

I leave you to draw your own conclusions about what that means or if it is significant.

Some of you are grown-ups who are also reality based thinkers.

Some of you can or have read your history.

Income and wealth distribution is an important indicator of economic health of a nation.

Now ehter it is a leading indicator or a residual artifact of the economy, one thing that will strike you if you looks at nations with this state of affairs or history havung been in that state is the people do badly, the governments are repressive and the nation is unstable politically.

Of course AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALIST thinkers might want to dismiss this fact as relevent to every nation but ours.

And while I hope they're right, nothing leads me to think they are right.

It works as long as pure Socialists are in charge. Problem is we have Communists masquerading as Socialists in Washington...and it seems that the disparity between the rich and the poor grows in Communist countries.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with communistm or socialism.

Its not a call to become more socialist or communist.

It is an observation that you are more than welcome to check for accuracy.

Be my guest.

Check every CAPITALIST nation on earrth.

If the wealth distribution is too lopsided?

The quality of life in that society is for shit.

We don't need to redistribute wealth we only need to stop giving every advantage to the rich at the expense of the working classes.

Supply side eeconomics taken to extremes DESTROYS the economy rather than making it stronger.

The evidence is out there but you will not find it listening to talking heads who are IDEALOGUES and not REALITY BASED thinkers.

 

[Revere]

Grow up. Someone will always have an advantage you don't and government can't fix that for you.

 

[bucs90]

I'd like to know why the unequal distribution of wealth is a bad thing. This seems to be a major premise from those on the left, but it's like you just assume it's a bad thing without every really providing evidence or justifying the premise.

Forcing me to work for somebody else is what the distribution of wealth is.

Distribution of wealth is Marxism.

Wealth is nothing more than ones labor, wealth is my labor in a tangible form I can trade for another person's labor.

That is why its bad, distribution of wealth is stealing, forced slavery, servitude, socialist/marxism.

Wealth is the physical representation of my labor, my work, my success, or my dumb luck.

Again, its the unequal distribution of intelligence that is the problem.

Wealth is much more than ones labor.


The 1% did not do the labor that created their wealth.

Most of them inherited it.

WTF???? You are a sad little liberal. You libtards truly believe that dont you?

First, let me say, what makes inherited money evil? Someone's parents decided to leave them that hard earned money, rather than spending their parenthood buying rims for their car, new iphones, starting up rap music labels that 99.9% of fail, etc.

It is a noble thing to leave wealth for your children, NOT an evil thing, so you libtards need to get off the envy trip.

Next, how do YOU know that? Most millionaires are self-made. Libtards envy of those who were smart enough to get rich is astounding.

How about all the NFL and NBA players making tens and tens of millions? They are among the elite rich. And many, if not most, grew up modest. They worked for that money. NO ONE has the right to take it from them. But, our country accepts a bit of tax for a small safety net.

A small safety net.....not a golden hand of welfare to guide one through life.

 

[bucs90]

What do you libtards think rich people do with their money? Wallpaper their homes with it? Write books on it? Bath in it? Built paper mountains?

No. They spend it. Invest it. Save it (crazy concept right?). And its taxed over and over and over.

If a rich guy builds a 2nd home, guess what? A construction crew just got work.

If a rich guy buys a new boat, a boat company made a sell.

If a rich guy takes a vacation, he buys fuel from a service station, pays for food, pays for a hotel room, pays for entertainment, etc, etc, etc.

The true problem you lefties have with the rich is that the rich get to enjoy these things as a fruit of either their own labor, or of the virtuous act of their parents being noble enough to leave their children with a good future. Some folks in the ghettos should take note of the noble act of setting kids up for a better life, eventually that road leads to a family tree that climbs the class ladder.

But you libtards dont wanna be the one in your family tree that sacrifices to set your future generation up with wealth. You want it for YOURSELF right now, but have failed to market yourself, develop a skill, or exploit a talent that would get you wealth through yourself, so you want men with guns (the gov't) to take it from others to give to you.

You libtards are truly pathetic organisms.