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.
But I do think many people including myself don't agree with the obscene and absurd differences in the amounts of stuff people possess. It seems to me we desperately need some sort of upper cap or limit, ideally implemented voluntarily by people themselves.
Why? Why do you care what other people have?
I really don't care how much wealth George Soros and other billionaires like him have.
I know a lot of 1% people and none of them "receive money from the Fed and loan it at high interest."
Maybe you should do a little research.
i believe he's talking about depository institutions, who borrow money from the fed and loan it out at a higher rate of interest.
they take "ownership" of this fed money, and then lend it out to different groups at different interest rates. The most worthy borrowers are large corporations, and they get some great terms.
Why aren't they protesting in front of the White House and other federal government buildings in DC? Let's face it, the banks took freebies, and these protesters would too if they had freebies offered to them. Their anger is focused in the wrong direction; they should be protesting at those who gave it out, not those who received it.
Seems like there's a double standard, depending on who (and what party) is in control of the White House at the time.
Correct! It is funny, really. The protestors want a government handout (forgive student loans, for example) and then protest banks that got government hand outs.
Maybe they don't know that the guy in the White House is the one deciding which companies get the hand outs.
I'm a moderate R--I think you have to get past party on this one. Is it Obama, or John Boehner's fault that the system has been so corrupted over the last 20 or 30 years?
Yes. They have the power. They are the government.
Quote:
They both walked into this--it's what we have now, and it's been moving in that direction for most of my adult lifetime. The only consistent player in this is big money. If people were protesting congress and the white house, this would turn into a partisan mess, with one side finger pointing at the other when they're both to blame for letting it happen. It's also an international problem--it's not just here. By focusing on Wall Street, it leaves the door open for both sides to respond and make changes. We've had enough gridlock--this should be something that both sides can agree with.
It will never work. These pathetic little protests will have no impact on Wall Street. Obama chooses which companies to bail out. Obama gave a half a billion dollars to Solyndra. Obama decided to bail out GM. If they don't like his Crony Capitalism, they should protest at the White House.
Quote:
Who can be against getting special interests out of elections? The r's have been complaining about unions and George Soros forever, and the D's about the Koch brothers and Karl Rove. It all needs to stop.
So you want more government control over who can exercise free speech? And you think that will solve the problem of Crony Capitalism? Would that have stopped the GM bail out? Didn't Obama fire the CEO of GM? So how did his campaign contributions help him?
i believe he's talking about depository institutions, who borrow money from the fed and loan it out at a higher rate of interest.
they take "ownership" of this fed money, and then lend it out to different groups at different interest rates. The most worthy borrowers are large corporations, and they get some great terms.
I really don't care how much wealth George Soros and other billionaires like him have.
Because despite printing presses, mints, inflation, etc., wealth doesn't grow on trees. If one person doubles their wealth, others will lose some of their wealth, which is exactly what the statistics show, a widening wealth gap. To a certain, limited extent that might be ok, but at the moment things are absurd. No man is an island, any human being only has a meaning in the context of society. Society is my family.
That's why I care, among other reasons. I am so against social Darwinism...
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.
