Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are assuming that inequality of income and/or assets, on its face, is a problem. You continue to ignore contributing factors.
It is. Why do you think poverty exists?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX
But comparing the incomes of 2 people or 2 classes is a smokescreen. The real measure of financial health is the difference between one's income and one's financial obligations.
There is a difference between income and wealthy. Both forms of extreme inequality are bad, albeit in different ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX
If two people have the exact same income, but different financial obligations, then there is still a net inequality. But such is the result of the choices made by the individuals, thus if a solution is needed, an individual rather than systemic solution is in order.
No. The system is responsible for extreme inequalities in both income and wealth.
For me its "Which political party has been brainwashed into believing that an extreme wealth gap is ok because rich people create jobs".........ok Ill take the opposite please.
For me its "Which political party has been brainwashed into believing that an extreme wealth gap is ok because rich people create jobs".........ok Ill take the opposite please.
They aren't brainwashed; they are bribed by the rich to protect the rich at your expense.
A common selling point for you people is that you want to spread the wealth/money so that more people can have more. Ok, but you do realize that it's the actual production of good and services that creates the real wealth correct? Money itself is worthless, it's just a method of making the trading of goods easier. The actual production of goods is what makes us rich. As technology grows more advanced the production and distribution of goods and services becomes more advanced which lowers prices and raises the overall wealth of society. This is the reason for why we are living better than earlier generations of humans.
The question of production just doesn't interest them though it should. I am a liberal but many of my fellows care just about what feels good, not what actually works.
For example, take global warming. You point out that some policy will cost lots of jobs, and mostly for poor and middle class (the people they supposedly champion) and they'll say "you have to start somewhere." Or if you point out that redistribution cuts incentives they'll say "well they're rich." In other words, little or no concern with what works, lots of concern with positions they feel good in advocating. Sort of like 12 year old girls in arrested development.
Ok, but you do realize that it's the actual production of good and services that creates the real wealth correct?
Actually, most of the wealth nowadays is from investment, not production.
Some (not all) of that investment is in companies that produce goods and services, but the people doing the work are not the people accumulating the wealth.
A common selling point for you people is that you want to spread the wealth/money so that more people can have more. Ok, but you do realize that it's the actual production of good and services that creates the real wealth correct? Money itself is worthless, it's just a method of making the trading of goods easier. The actual production of goods is what makes us rich. As technology grows more advanced the production and distribution of goods and services becomes more advanced which lowers prices and raises the overall wealth of society. This is the reason for why we are living better than earlier generations of humans.
However, I almost never hear people who are in favor of left-leaning economical views actually mention or discuss this. They are always focusing on the actual money/wealth itself, as if it is somehow the true valuables. It's not. If you want to make people better off, then you need to find a way to make the production of goods and services more advanced. That is the ONLY way standards of living can become higher. As as always been the case in history.
Let's say you have your way and that starting today the rich pay a 90% tax and everyone else way less, that the minimum wage is way higher, and that welfare/social programs are used to give people more of the rich peoples money.
Now what? How will this make the economy stronger? How has doing this contributed to increased production and distribution of goods and services? What is the economic magic behind your wealth distribution ideas???
In a severely weak economy, or in times of war, the demand side created by central spending can result in significant improvements. A better economy in the first, winning a war in the second.
As we lift up and out from recession, the supply side becomes more important.
We have been in a weak economy now for so long, that many forget the supply side. On the other hand many conservatives have been stuck on the supply side even with our recession. And I would bet that in their gut, they think that private enterprise somehow funded on its own helped the Allies win WW2.
People who are uber-wealthy need government even more. No new government was ever created by the common man.
Not the USA?
<LOL>
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
