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 think if one were to lower the living standards of the top 82% and bring up the bottom 12% to an average, then that type of decline in living standards would be appropriate.
It always amazes me that some people measure their own well being in terms of what other people have.
I think if one were to lower the living standards of the top 82% and bring up the bottom 12% to an average, then that type of decline in living standards would be appropriate.
Peoples living standards are directly proportional to their military capabilities. That is why there is a silent nuclear arms race right now. IF you can get nukes and good delivery systems (the good stuff not some half baked crap) then you can dictate your terms and have a seat and voice at the table. without nukes and a robust conventional military force your going to be a slave.
Its been like this since the beginning of time. Most US states are now subserviant to the Fed govt, the federal govt is the only one that can do things like dictate tarrifs or anti trust laws. So even if a state does not like what is going on they cant stop imports/exports or bust up a company. They cant issue passports or stop certian people from coming in, etc.
We have effectivly become the Roman empire, everything is ran from DC.
It always amazes me that some people measure their own well being in terms of what other people have.
the reverse seems even more prevalent . they judge what others need by their own criteria . how many times do you see others say that if you need more than x-amount of money to live on you are either wasteful , over spending or should move from where you live ..
Typically, the man pointing to the tree planted it, so yes.
He also took the risk. Many thing could have gone wrong before the tree could be cut down. Drought, fire, wind, etc. Then he would have been left with nothing.
Those that hate on the rich tend to forget that the rich are the ones taking risks. With risk comes reward.
I only read the first 10 pages and there are so many varieties of opinion and no understanding of how the economy is really run and how it should be run. Difference of opinion reigns.
I'll try to show what makes a person rich. Hard work? persistence? luck? Nothing of the sort. Why does a ceo get paid hundreds of times the average worker? It comes down to rights. At present corporations and rich people have more influence on the government than the population in general. Recently, I came across this map: https://www.ituc-csi.org/ituc-global...dex-2017-18767
With the exception of a few countries in the world, workers have little to no rights in how to run the business and how salaries should be distributed. Capital is as necessary as workers, but only investor have a saying as if workers had not contributed anything to the creation of capital. Only the capital side is taken into consideration. In other words, the less rights workers have the more investors can extract. The best example of this, is china. Investors from all over the world want to get into china. Little or no regard for human rights or the environment is a paradise for rich people.
There are many backwards practices in our society that I could point out, but I'll just say something else that I think is doing the most damage to society. Another reason some people can accumulate incredible amount of money is because money doesn't have an expiration date. Money is a mean of exchange. It should represent the good and services in the world. Let's take a few goods: Food is good from a few weeks to a few years. a laptop is good for about 5 years more or less, then it is useless. A car? 15 years maybe. But money which supposedly represent all these things that are used up never expire; it is past down to the next generation. This is one of the most anti-social practice in society that people take as a matter of fact.
Now, what do rich people do with all the wealth they have accumulated? They put it into the stock market. The believe is that it represent the economy, businesses and the like. Nothing could be further from the truth. Stock investors say it themselves, it is pure speculation. Prices go up and down depending on whether people are buying or selling. Nothing to do with the real economy. Making money out of money actually destroys values.
As long as people continue to talk about their own ideas capitalism vs socialism, rich vs poor, etc. and ignore the realities of life, things will only continue to get worst.
If I have something that you “need,” should you be able to compel me to sell it to you at a price that you deem appropriate, rather than at the price that I deem appropriate?
Yes, thats how things have been since the dawn of time. Militaries rise up and they go in and take it by force. People have fought over irrigatable land, minerals, etc since the dawn of man.
Medicines are a sort of grey area, yea if you invented some pill you get to dictate the price as its your intellectual property, but as soon as that patent is up your done. But people gobbling up stuff that was put here by God for us to use (land, natural resoruces, etc) is a serious problem. I consider food, energy and real estate to be basically utilities, if we want to not be hunter and gatheres then this stuff has to be regulated.
He also took the risk. Many thing could have gone wrong before the tree could be cut down. Drought, fire, wind, etc. Then he would have been left with nothing.
Those that hate on the rich tend to forget that the rich are the ones taking risks. With risk comes reward.
How much risk is there when they can just bankrupt out and get corporate welfare while students who get an education are stuck with their debt for life? Sure if corporate bankruptcy was treated like student loans and the govt put a boot to the throat of any business that bankrupted and issued out decades long jail time there would be risk and I woudl agree with you.
But the current system there is little risk, you might loose a little seed money in the bankruptcy but you can go right back at it again in 7 years.
I love how people think you need money to defend billionaires. They create wealth, they're not the enemy. It's called trickle down economics.
The welfare recipient with 4 kids asking for a minimal wage hike for her job at Wal-Mart is the enemy.
Wal Mart is the enemy, they are a soulless entitiy and their buildings are like sterile mental institutions. I would not be sad if they ceased to exist.
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.
