Wealth Inequality is not an Economic topic

[LeftofLeft]

This term is used by liberals in their economic arguments. These are not economic arguments.... they are social and political arguments. If you ask me, it’s a class warfare catalyst based on perception, not reality.

First of all, define “wealth inequality”. Is it because I earned more money vs. my neighbor in a given year? Or is it Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama sitting on their $Millions wagging their fingers at me saying “at a certain point, you’ve made enough money”. Why is tax cuts for those who pay the most and assume the most economic risk such a bad thing?

You want to see wealth inequality? Look around the globe at socialist and communist economies. In those regimes, You will see 1 percent wealthy locked in while the rest are simply the masses with no economic opportunity.

No prosperous economy ever came out of class envy.

 

[The Original Tree]

It's a Communist, Fascist, Socialist, Satanist Topic.

Get a Job you Hippies!

Screw you lazy son of a bitches with no work ethic and no initiative. My personal opinion is that we should abolish Welfare and Food Stamps. Horribly abused programs.

Get off your asses and work or starve.

 

[fncceo]

I can't figure out why some many people get upset about Wealth Inequality ... but no one gets upset over the real unfair gap in our society.... Attractiveness inequality.

Why is it fair that a small amount of the population gets to look like this ...

While so many other have to look like this?

Everyone should be equally attractive.

 

[progressive hunter]

This term is used by liberals in their economic arguments. These are not economic arguments.... they are social and political arguments. If you ask me, it’s a class warfare catalyst based on perception, not reality.

First of all, define “wealth inequality”. Is it because I earned more money vs. my neighbor in a given year? Or is it Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama sitting on their $Millions wagging their fingers at me saying “at a certain point, you’ve made enough money”. Why is tax cuts for those who pay the most and assume the most economic risk such a bad thing?

You want to see wealth inequality? Look around the globe at socialist and communist economies. In those regimes, You will see 1 percent wealthy locked in while the rest are simply the masses with no economic opportunity.

No prosperous economy ever came out of class envy.

those are leftist not liberals,,,

try getting it straight,,,

 

[Brain357]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...sing-inequality-hurts-everyone-even-the-rich/

Some of the pain is economic: The studies suggest that the inequality depresses economic growth, leaving less for society to divvy up — regardless of how its members decide to do so. And some of it is social: Studies have found that inequality, particularly the high level seen in the present-day United States, gives rise to criminal behavior.

Those effects can take a chunk out of your paycheck, regardless of whether you're in the bottom 99 percent or the top 1 percent. Leading economists and economic organizations are coming around to the idea that to maximize income and wealth for everyone — including those at the top — there have to be meaningful checks on income and wealth inequality.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This term is used by liberals in their economic arguments. These are not economic arguments.... they are social and political arguments. If you ask me, it’s a class warfare catalyst based on perception, not reality.

First of all, define “wealth inequality”. Is it because I earned more money vs. my neighbor in a given year? Or is it Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama sitting on their $Millions wagging their fingers at me saying “at a certain point, you’ve made enough money”. Why is tax cuts for those who pay the most and assume the most economic risk such a bad thing?

You want to see wealth inequality? Look around the globe at socialist and communist economies. In those regimes, You will see 1 percent wealthy locked in while the rest are simply the masses with no economic opportunity.

No prosperous economy ever came out of class envy.

Of course the shrinking percentage of GDP that is available to the majority of consumers is an econmic concern.

Fool.

 

[LeftofLeft]

How is it that if the US has the greatest income or wealth inequality, it is an economic superpower? Further, name a country with an economy of less income inequality has more demand among all immigrants worldwide?

 

[The Original Tree]

This term is used by liberals in their economic arguments. These are not economic arguments.... they are social and political arguments. If you ask me, it’s a class warfare catalyst based on perception, not reality.

First of all, define “wealth inequality”. Is it because I earned more money vs. my neighbor in a given year? Or is it Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama sitting on their $Millions wagging their fingers at me saying “at a certain point, you’ve made enough money”. Why is tax cuts for those who pay the most and assume the most economic risk such a bad thing?

You want to see wealth inequality? Look around the globe at socialist and communist economies. In those regimes, You will see 1 percent wealthy locked in while the rest are simply the masses with no economic opportunity.

No prosperous economy ever came out of class envy.

those are leftist not liberals,,,

try getting it straight,,,

Classical Liberal do not Exist anymore.

It's a case of Historical Appropriation by The Left.

 

[occupied]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

 

[Brain357]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

Why do you think we need to move toward socialism for less inequality? We had less when we had more of a free market economy. Currently we have way too much corporate socialism.

 

[rightwinger]

I don’t care if there is wealth inequality as long as those who are accumulating most of societies wealth, pay most of societies taxes

 

[occupied]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

I'm not sure what point you are trying make here. Are you defending wealth inequality as a good thing in this country? We still have opportunity to be sure but no one can say that we have enough opportunity for all sufficiently motivated people to achieve prosperity no matter where they start on the ladder.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

I'm not sure what point you are trying make here. Are you defending wealth inequality as a good thing in this country? We still have opportunity to be sure but no one can say that we have enough opportunity for all sufficiently motivated people to achieve prosperity no matter where they start on the ladder.

Compared to what, where, or whom? I’m saying income wealth inequality exists everywhere. Your side says it is the most here in the US. If that is the case, how do you explain the most opportunity and the most prosperity? If you want to enhance that, let’s hear it. I fail to see how moving in the direction of other less prosperous, less opportunity economies (socialism) gets us there if people are rejecting those economies in favor of US.

 

[Agit8r]

As evidenced by Epstein's mid-west slave trade, the problem is that the rich are largely immune from any laws. They act as governmentalities, or imperio in imperium, and the people then feel the rod of the tyrant as surely as if wielded by the state itself.

 

[Brain357]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

I'm not sure what point you are trying make here. Are you defending wealth inequality as a good thing in this country? We still have opportunity to be sure but no one can say that we have enough opportunity for all sufficiently motivated people to achieve prosperity no matter where they start on the ladder.

Compared to what, where, or whom? I’m saying income wealth inequality exists everywhere. Your side says it is the most here in the US. If that is the case, how do you explain the most opportunity and the most prosperity? If you want to enhance that, let’s hear it. I fail to see how moving in the direction of other less prosperous, less opportunity economies (socialism) gets us there if people are rejecting those economies in favor of US.

U.S. lags behind peer countries in mobility

 

[LeftofLeft]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

I'm not sure what point you are trying make here. Are you defending wealth inequality as a good thing in this country? We still have opportunity to be sure but no one can say that we have enough opportunity for all sufficiently motivated people to achieve prosperity no matter where they start on the ladder.

Compared to what, where, or whom? I’m saying income wealth inequality exists everywhere. Your side says it is the most here in the US. If that is the case, how do you explain the most opportunity and the most prosperity? If you want to enhance that, let’s hear it. I fail to see how moving in the direction of other less prosperous, less opportunity economies (socialism) gets us there if people are rejecting those economies in favor of US.

U.S. lags behind peer countries in mobility

Better tell the immigrants on the opportunity they are missing in other countries. The keyword in the report is “snapshot” as in “current”. Show me one over time, say 50-100 years. How about sustainability? Are these flashes in the pan? Finally, how about real individual income and wealth compared to US.

 

[Brain357]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

I'm not sure what point you are trying make here. Are you defending wealth inequality as a good thing in this country? We still have opportunity to be sure but no one can say that we have enough opportunity for all sufficiently motivated people to achieve prosperity no matter where they start on the ladder.

Compared to what, where, or whom? I’m saying income wealth inequality exists everywhere. Your side says it is the most here in the US. If that is the case, how do you explain the most opportunity and the most prosperity? If you want to enhance that, let’s hear it. I fail to see how moving in the direction of other less prosperous, less opportunity economies (socialism) gets us there if people are rejecting those economies in favor of US.

U.S. lags behind peer countries in mobility

Better tell the immigrants on the opportunity they are missing in other countries. The keyword in the report is “snapshot” as in “current”. Show me one over time, say 50-100 years. How about sustainability? Are these flashes in the pan? Finally, how about real individual income and wealth compared to US.

Our immigrants probably can’t walk to those countries.

Aren’t we more interested in current. Past opportunities don’t do people much good now.

 

[Brain357]

Wealth inequality is connected to a host of other problems social, political and economic. The chief concern is obvious, freedom cannot endure with a politically entrenched generational aristocracy running things.

How much freedom comparatively speaking is there in more socialist economies with more of an entrenched generational aristocracy? People flee those economies to come here. Why move more in the direction of Socialism where the 1 percent is more locked vs. here in the US where there is more opportunity? Show me an immigrant who moved to a Socialist country and ascended up the economic chain?

I'm not sure what point you are trying make here. Are you defending wealth inequality as a good thing in this country? We still have opportunity to be sure but no one can say that we have enough opportunity for all sufficiently motivated people to achieve prosperity no matter where they start on the ladder.

Compared to what, where, or whom? I’m saying income wealth inequality exists everywhere. Your side says it is the most here in the US. If that is the case, how do you explain the most opportunity and the most prosperity? If you want to enhance that, let’s hear it. I fail to see how moving in the direction of other less prosperous, less opportunity economies (socialism) gets us there if people are rejecting those economies in favor of US.

U.S. lags behind peer countries in mobility

Better tell the immigrants on the opportunity they are missing in other countries. The keyword in the report is “snapshot” as in “current”. Show me one over time, say 50-100 years. How about sustainability? Are these flashes in the pan? Finally, how about real individual income and wealth compared to US.

Social mobility in richest countries 'has stalled since 1990s'