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.
I don't think it's necessary to inherit wealth. It's enough to be shrewd and manage to redirect money away from others into one's own pockets. Compiling wealth is an egoistic act at the expense of others, be it directly or indirectly. It's just hopelessly naive to assume there can be a society where everyone is wealthy. Unless you have a giant bloated bubble economy that can burst any moment and destroy the entire country.
Why does it have to be Rich vs Poor or middle class?
When did being Rich become a stigma??
Don't we all strive to be RICH in all our endeavors? Don't you want your kids to be Rich?
There are aHoles in all classes and cultures of society. The middle class and poor are not all saints and the Rich are not all slimy low lifes...
Class warfare is what keeps this country from prospering. We are too busy blaming other folks for having too much that we loose site of what's really important.
Major flaws with your analagy, just because the blacksmith wont create a new hammer, this doesnt mean someone else wont
If I see Mr Blacksmith getting rich, I'm going to takeup the blacksmith trade and become rich.
Furthermore, the posting discusses wealth redistribution, which is not the same as wealth creation.
Under your scenario, if they create another hammer, this creates competition for Mr Blacksmith, and thus lowers the cost of providing the service. it did NOT create more wealth, it just changed who got it and how much was transferred.
Sorry PG wrong. Is there more wealth today than 2,000 years ago? The answer is obviously yes. How is that possible if wealth is zero sum?
The guy who invented the first hammer created wealth as did the inventor of Cable TV as did Bill Gates. Before these folks created their inventions the wealth associated with these things didn't exist. Do me a favor, Google economy and zero sum and see what you find to support your view.
Many people these days only become rich because of patents, licences, trademarks, monopolies, etc., not because of actual work that would justify that kind of income.
Many people these days only become rich because of patents, licences, trademarks, monopolies, etc., not because of actual work that would justify that kind of income.
Whoa!!!!!!
I worked very hard to get my license, then made major investments of my time and money.
I worked very hard to get my license, then made major investments of my time and money.
I still work 80 plus hour per week in the summer.
Yes, you are a great exception as we all know from your recurring posts, we are so proud of you
People like Bill Gates would not be so rich if it weren't for license fees and trademarks. If his income matched his actual work, he would be as wealthy as a normal upper middle-class employee.
It is no coincidence that corporations employ armies of legal experts in order to maximize the number of patents, trademarks etc. It is all a bubble economy without substance...
Yes, you are a great exception as we all know from your recurring posts, we are so proud of you
People like Bill Gates would not be so rich if it weren't for license fees and trademarks. If his income matched his actual work, he would be as wealthy as a normal upper middle-class employee.
It is no coincidence that corporations employ armies of legal experts in order to maximize the number of patents, trademarks etc. It is all a bubble economy without substance...
so you are against the inventors getting credit????
before microsoft made it so that everyone (computers) could talk to each other...you couldnt
every manufacturer had a different machine language...even different variations of cobol, and fortran....heck there was 12 different versions of DOS basic
gates and plenty others has the IDEAS, and the FORTITUDE to put those ideas to work
doesnt matter if you are talking about cars, lightbulbs, computers, or the little umbrellas put in drinks
so you are against the inventors getting credit????
before microsoft made it so that everyone (computers) could talk to each other...you couldnt
every manufacturer had a different machine language...even different variations of cobol, and fortran....heck there was 12 different versions of DOS basic
gates and plenty others has the IDEAS, and the FORTITUDE to put those ideas to work
doesnt matter if you are talking about cars, lightbulbs, computers, or the little umbrellas put in drinks
Due credit is OK, but not the hopelessly exaggerated "credit", nor does credit have to be material in nature.
Gates copied (euphemism) his ideas from others, nor could he have brought about Windows without all the other programmers who did the work for him and who only received a microscopic share of Gates' income.
Yes, you are a great exception as we all know from your recurring posts, we are so proud of you
People like Bill Gates would not be so rich if it weren't for license fees and trademarks. If his income matched his actual work, he would be as wealthy as a normal upper middle-class employee.
It is no coincidence that corporations employ armies of legal experts in order to maximize the number of patents, trademarks etc. It is all a bubble economy without substance...
Do you have any idea how envious your post sounds????
IMO, Bill Gates works very hard.
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.
