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.
They are supposed to verify the information, and they didn't. How is that not dishonest? There are also plenty of reported instances of lenders actually coaching the applicants on the numbers needed to be in order to for the loan to be granted.
The financial institutions new exactly what they were doing. The loans were ****, but they knew they'd pass that **** onto someone else the next day, so they didn't care.
We are constantly bombarded by finance and loan BS. Propaganda. A substantial portion of the population function like money addicts and are particularly susceptible. If grade schoolers were taught reality, that they'd end up a lot wealthier if they avoided loans and credit, finance would quickly drop to a sensible level.
How many homeless does it take to match a rent seeking heavy hitter in banking, tax avoidance, and big pharma etc.? Why even cats can collect rent and homeless people cant? Who does more harm - a homeless person or Martin Shkreli and such?
Some people are angry about the homeless because the sight of homeless people ruin their day.
If you are worth a wage increase, why not go work somewhere where you will be paid what you are worth?
There is a surplus of low-wage labor in my area, as there is in many areas, i.e. there are plenty more cogs like me who will work for peanuts.
Contrary to what some believe, productivity sets only a ceiling for wages and not a floor. Where a surplus of productive workers exists, employers lack competitive pressure to increase wages.
productivity sets only a ceiling for wages and not a floor. Where a surplus of productive workers exists, employers lack competitive pressure to increase wages.
Truest thing you've said, but that doesn't mean you are actually "worth more" than you are being paid. In the real world you are worth whatever you can get.
Regarding productivity and wages the whole "marginal productivity" theory is ridiculous. Scandinavian countries manage to pay $20/hr floor wages with no ill effects. A tiny bit of logic and reasoning will show why, but that is well beyond the average person (or economist).
According to a poster named Chance and Change we are witnessing a return to the culture that infested the pre American Civil War South. Indeed they lost the military phase of the War but the Plantation owners in conjunction with the Robber Barons of northern industry and mega banks of Wall Street have nearly won the political and economic fight. They can only accept a society where they and their comrades are living in astonishing luxury created by an addictive greed when every dollar more is not enough supported by a mass of modern day wage slaves and professional peasants.
The last election was a good example of the results of this behind the scenes conflict. The Democrats, under the tutelage of Bill Clinton, a fine example of a person addicted to monetary greed and political power, along with Hillary Clinton, were more concerned with their wealthy donors than with the rest of us. The Republicans nominated the ultimate plutocrat in Donald Trump. He exemplifies the addiction to acquisition and control. Willing using some help from the Russian kleptocracy and a willing Mr. Comey of the FBI, the Donald won the Electoral College by convincing the working class of a few states that he was the fearless Daddy that would stop their descent into semi or actual poverty.
Given his versions of the Health Care and Tax bills it is obvious the Donald is a card carrying member of the old Confederate plantation plutocracy. Most of America was hoodwinked by a master con man. I hope they like what happens because it will be economically painful for 95% of then and us. It also might result in a nuclear war with an equally crazed Korean.
If nobody profited from taking risks society would never advance...
This is of course true, but the opposite extreme – where to the winner goes the totality of the spoils – is probably no less pernicious and unjust, than some relentless leveling system, where excellence or risk-taking is never rewarded.
In other words, consider the case of 1000 people, where 100 take risks, but the other 900 do not. Of the first 100, 90 go bankrupt, 9 succeed to moderate extent, and one becomes fabulously successful. How should wealth be allocated? Should that one massive-winner be soaked for his/her wealth? Maybe have the wealth entirely confiscated? Or, should the other 990 (or 999) be left with nothing, while that single winner wins everything? Presumably the ideal solution is somewhere in between. But where? It’s a nontrivial question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinivanDriver
It is a badly-disguised politics of envy, the notion of "I don't have it so you shouldn't."
But that's just human nature. Indeed, isn't envy itself a powerful motivator for taking risks and for innovating? If I never covet anything that my neighbor has, why should I ever work hard?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinivanDriver
The problem with Pikety's beliefs are manifold. He ignores that the people with high wealth today, people such as Gates, Bezos, and Buffett, earned every dime of their wealth. What's more, I find that his theory of economic inequality flies in the fact of statistical fact, especially when you realize that extreme poverty as a percentage of the total global population has cratered over the past 25 years.
The inequality is at the top, not at the bottom. Piketty gets that part wrong. For billions of the world’s poor, life today is substantially improved from that of 40 or 80 or whatnot years ago. Whether that comes from productive investment by the very wealthy, from wise governance and public-sector policies, from sheer luck, from exploitation of natural resources, from divine intervention or whatever else, well, I don’t know. But the irksome rub of inequality is between billionaires and mere millionaires. How many computer-scientists were nearly as smart (or just as smart) as Bill Gates? In so many fields, be it computers or chess or music, the difference in excellence between the very very best, and the merely very good, isn’t so high. But the difference in reward – money, accolades, prestige – is huge indeed.
The inequality is at the top, not at the bottom. Piketty gets that part wrong. For billions of the world’s poor, life today is substantially improved from that of 40 or 80 or whatnot years ago. Whether that comes from productive investment by the very wealthy, from wise governance and public-sector policies, from sheer luck, from exploitation of natural resources, from divine intervention or whatever else, well, I don’t know. But the irksome rub of inequality is between billionaires and mere millionaires. How many computer-scientists were nearly as smart (or just as smart) as Bill Gates? In so many fields, be it computers or chess or music, the difference in excellence between the very very best, and the merely very good, isn’t so high. But the difference in reward – money, accolades, prestige – is huge indeed.
The rich became mega-rich in the same scheme that made the very poor less poor, and the developed middle class poorer (this was the source of funds for both). Oligarchs used globalization and finance to divorce themselves from a dependence on domestic consumer buying power. It's no accident that big income tax cuts, "trade and fiscal deficits don't matter", easy credit, and the gutting of unions, happened together. Oddly our supposedly democratic government supported this, and our supposedly free press continues to hide it.
Loads of people are better engineers and scientists than Gates. It was clever and ruthless business practices and a little luck (mostly being early) that resulted in his success.
Loads of people are better engineers and scientists than Gates. It was clever and ruthless business practices and a little luck (mostly being early) that resulted in his success.
So true, even Warren Buffet has talked about his "luck" and being in the right place at the right time. Yes, luck might only be a small part of someone's success, but it is still there and can be anything from knowing the right people, or getting a loan from a family member or someone leaving or getting fired and you get that promotion.
How much coding did Steve Jobs actually do at Apple? He was smart enough to surround himself with the right people that could turn his ideas into reality and being a ruthless businessman along the way.
The rich are basically just like the poor and will take every and any "handout" they can get, be it favorable tax structures and loopholes that they can exploit since they already have lots of capital and can go from just rich to mega-rich. The rich didn't get there from giving away their money left and right, that's for sure!
Rule #1 in becoming rich, try and use as little of your own money as possible, Rule #2, see Rule#1!
Truest thing you've said, but that doesn't mean you are actually "worth more" than you are being paid. In the real world you are worth whatever you can get.
Regarding productivity and wages the whole "marginal productivity" theory is ridiculous. Scandinavian countries manage to pay $20/hr floor wages with no ill effects. A tiny bit of logic and reasoning will show why, but that is well beyond the average person (or economist).
Everything is massively expensive in the Scandinavian countries. Add to that the big taxes on almost everything, and that $20 an hour is not much.
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.
