Wealth gap is at critical mass

#202
#202
Isn't it hilarious that the same kind of socialist policies aimed at "redistributing the wealth", actually end up creating far more wealth inequality than capitalism ever could dream of.

cough* Venezuela *cough
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#203
#203
The above is why I love these wealth distribution ideas. The numbers never add up to that much.

Yeah sure the Tibetan goat farmer might think 500 is a windfall of note, but most of the civilized world wouldn't have their life changed by it.

The same tools anyone would need for the money to change their life are things they could already do. If I got my fair share of 500 bucks and spent it, I would be right where I am. If I took that 500 and invested it I could retire a little earlier. Again except for the absolute destitute who have no clue what money even is, it wouldn't change things. Even then, the sudden influx of cash to EVERYONE would cause prices to skyrocket until things adjusted. Likely diminishing any return these people got from someone else's money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and Matt2496
#204
#204
Matt2496 said:
Isn't it hilarious that the same kind of socialist policies aimed at "redistributing the wealth", actually end up creating far more wealth inequality than capitalism ever could dream of.

cough* Venezuela *cough
Click to expand...
Communism and socialism, putting even more money in fewer hands than anyone else.

You're supposed to be happy that everyone else is now as poor as you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and Matt2496
#205
#205
SamRebel35 said:
The wealth gap is troubling because I'm sure not all of the wealth was obtained through ethical and fair practices. Much of it was inherited. Much of it was gained by exploiting crony relations with governments. That's why I think it is dumb to think the government should be in charge of "fixing it". They only make monopolies of industries worse when the enforce strict regulations. Competition in industries is how you end these wealth gaps. Not government intervention.
Click to expand...
inherited wealth is unethical?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and 82_VOL_83
#206
#206
LouderVol said:
Communism and socialism, putting even more money in fewer hands than anyone else.

You're supposed to be happy that everyone else is now as poor as you.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Everyone else gets poorer while the elite stay as wealthy as ever.
 
#209
#209
Mick said:
I pay taxes and you get paid to do a government job. You didn't receive one red cent from the capitalist. You want to equate taxes to socialism so explain how the military is shining example of capitalism. Do you even realize the military is 100% a socialist institution created to protect every American citizen and taxes support it? Maybe you should have joined Blackwater instead.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...

Isn't the common defense specifically outlined in the Constitution?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#210
#210
Grand Vol said:
Hmmm...

Isn't the common defense specifically outlined in the Constitution?
Click to expand...
Does that even matter to the argument at hand or did you get lost in your own rebel rousing. I take it you're not going to admit the importance socialism played in helping you land where you did. You didn't like where the argument was going so you tried to make it about the constitution. Classic Grand.
 
#211
#211
Mick said:
Does that even matter to the argument at hand or did you get lost in your own rebel rousing. I take it you're not going to admit the importance socialism played in helping you land where you did. You didn't like where the argument was going so you tried to make it about the constitution. Classic Grand.
Click to expand...

Actually, your argument made no sense. I was offering you an out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obsessed, 82_VOL_83 and NorthDallas40
#212
#212
LouderVol said:
The above is why I love these wealth distribution ideas. The numbers never add up to that much.

Yeah sure the Tibetan goat farmer might think 500 is a windfall of note, but most of the civilized world wouldn't have their life changed by it.

The same tools anyone would need for the money to change their life are things they could already do. If I got my fair share of 500 bucks and spent it, I would be right where I am. If I took that 500 and invested it I could retire a little earlier. Again except for the absolute destitute who have no clue what money even is, it wouldn't change things. Even then, the sudden influx of cash to EVERYONE would cause prices to skyrocket until things adjusted. Likely diminishing any return these people got from someone else's money.
Click to expand...


This takes a very complicated worldwide problem and translates it into an oversimplistic representation of the issue. It is not as simple as taking the entirety of the wealth of the 26 and redistributing it to the 3.6 billion. In fact, as I said earlier, my having posted it is not about what gets done about it, if anything at all.

My point is that I do not believe that over the long term society (across the globe) is going to be willing to put up with an economy (or economies) that seem to promote this disparity.

You can criticize, debate, summarize, etc., all you want the folly of solutions to the problem.. But I think it is a mistake to ignore the problem based on your complaints about any of the proposed solutions. Regardless of whether any effort is ever made to meaningfully deal with the issue, it IS an issue and I do believe it is going to come to a head sooner than later.
 
#213
#213
Mick said:
Does that even matter to the argument at hand or did you get lost in your own rebel rousing. I take it you're not going to admit the importance socialism played in helping you land where you did. You didn't like where the argument was going so you tried to make it about the constitution. Classic Grand.
Click to expand...
Speaking of RABBLE rousing, are you really this dense or are you just joshing with us again mickey???
 
#215
#215
lawgator1 said:
This takes a very complicated worldwide problem and translates it into an oversimplistic representation of the issue. It is not as simple as taking the entirety of the wealth of the 26 and redistributing it to the 3.6 billion. In fact, as I said earlier, my having posted it is not about what gets done about it, if anything at all.

My point is that I do not believe that over the long term society (across the globe) is going to be willing to put up with an economy (or economies) that seem to promote this disparity.

You can criticize, debate, summarize, etc., all you want the folly of solutions to the problem.. But I think it is a mistake to ignore the problem based on your complaints about any of the proposed solutions. Regardless of whether any effort is ever made to meaningfully deal with the issue, it IS an issue and I do believe it is going to come to a head sooner than later.
Click to expand...
color me racist but I don't give a **** about "global" society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, SpaceCoastVol, NorthDallas40 and 2 others
#217
#217
LouderVol said:
The above is why I love these wealth distribution ideas. The numbers never add up to that much.

Yeah sure the Tibetan goat farmer might think 500 is a windfall of note, but most of the civilized world wouldn't have their life changed by it.

The same tools anyone would need for the money to change their life are things they could already do. If I got my fair share of 500 bucks and spent it, I would be right where I am. If I took that 500 and invested it I could retire a little earlier. Again except for the absolute destitute who have no clue what money even is, it wouldn't change things. Even then, the sudden influx of cash to EVERYONE would cause prices to skyrocket until things adjusted. Likely diminishing any return these people got from someone else's money.
Click to expand...
And you are hitting on the problem with the idiot left 'universal income' plan. If everybody gets $1000, what do you think Joe 6pack wll do with it? He ain't gonna save it. So his personal standing vis a vis wealth accumulation will be right back where it was. But he'll have that new 55" TV or a new set of rims for his Lexus that he will owe on for another 4 or 5 years. BUt that will stimulate the economy, right Dims?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#218
#218
82_VOL_83 said:
color me racist but I don't give a **** about "global" society.
Click to expand...


Again, you are not getting it. It's not about right or wrong, wise solution or no. It is about recognizing its a problem to begin with.

It is as though I'm describing an asteroid 3 weeks away from destroying Earth and you are willing to let it hit us just because you don't think firing nukes at it will work well.
 
#219
#219
lawgator1 said:
This takes a very complicated worldwide problem and translates it into an oversimplistic representation of the issue. It is not as simple as taking the entirety of the wealth of the 26 and redistributing it to the 3.6 billion. In fact, as I said earlier, my having posted it is not about what gets done about it, if anything at all.

My point is that I do not believe that over the long term society (across the globe) is going to be willing to put up with an economy (or economies) that seem to promote this disparity.

You can criticize, debate, summarize, etc., all you want the folly of solutions to the problem.. But I think it is a mistake to ignore the problem based on your complaints about any of the proposed solutions. Regardless of whether any effort is ever made to meaningfully deal with the issue, it IS an issue and I do believe it is going to come to a head sooner than later.
Click to expand...
It has before. And will again. Look at pretty much any revolt ever. Too much power(money) in the wrong hands.

The issue I see with the disparity argument for being a problem is that it takes the world (general) problem and applies the specifics of the situation in the US to it.

It's not that we ignore it, I think everyone here is trying to get wealthy their own way. The issue is any cure you might offer is at least as bad as the disease.

Letting people make their own choices they can decide if there is a problem. If they are fine with their situation, they can sit on their thumbs. If they arent they are free to pursue legal methods to increase their wealth. I see any type of wealth distribution as similar to the broken window fallacy. You dont create wealth through destruction. You move money around but it doesnt create anything itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#221
#221
SpaceCoastVol said:
And you are hitting on the problem with the idiot left 'universal income' plan. If everybody gets $1000, what do you think Joe 6pack wll do with it? He ain't gonna save it. So his personal standing vis a vis wealth accumulation will be right back where it was. But he'll have that new 55" TV or a new set of rims for his Lexus that he will owe on for another 4 or 5 years. BUt that will stimulate the economy, right Dims?
Click to expand...
Wealth redistribution is just the lottery. Except you are taking money away from non participants.

The lottery has proven you cant just give people money and expect lives to change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and SpaceCoastVol
#222
#222
Mick said:
Does that even matter to the argument at hand or did you get lost in your own rebel rousing. I take it you're not going to admit the importance socialism played in helping you land where you did. You didn't like where the argument was going so you tried to make it about the constitution. Classic Grand.
Click to expand...

Not to step on GV's toes here, but socialism isnt funding nor had any part in the military jack. Sure, taxpayers have paid for military personnel and equipment, but the framers of our country along with the rest of the population knew it was needed and MOST would give freely to that notion even today. Its called patriotism and security.

Patriots know this.

Now socialism on the other hand is taking one persons things and distributing it to any lazy jackwagon who wont work. Only idiots cant see the problems with this "idea".

Now....if you don't think paying brave americans to do things that others are too afraid or selfish to do, in order to protect you and your family.....you just need to GTFO!

Seriously...just leave the country that is so bad in your mind and go check out some other ones until you find that perfect socialist utopia you dream of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, 82_VOL_83 and volfanjustin
#223
#223
volinsd said:
Not to step on GV's toes here, but socialism isnt funding nor had any part in the military jack. Sure, taxpayers have paid for military personnel and equipment, but the framers of our country along with the rest of the population knew it was needed and MOST would give freely to that notion even today. Its called patriotism and security.

Patriots know this.

Now socialism on the other hand is taking one persons things and distributing it to any lazy jackwagon who wont work. Only idiots cant see the problems with this "idea".

Now....if you don't think paying brave americans to do things that others are too afraid or selfish to do, in order to protect you and your family.....you just need to GTFO!

Seriously...just leave the country that is so bad in your mind and go check out some other ones until you find that perfect socialist utopia you dream of.
Click to expand...
I dont think everyone wants the military. And ours has gone far beyond self defense.

With the glut that is our military spending and the fact that our troops spend more time in classrooms than on the yard or the range I would say there is plenty of wasted socialized money there.
 
#224
#224
LouderVol said:
I dont think everyone wants the military. And ours has gone far beyond self defense.

With the glut that is our military spending and the fact that our troops spend more time in classrooms than on the yard or the range I would say there is plenty of wasted socialized money there.
Click to expand...
You view 'classroom' time as a waste of dollars?
 
#225
#225
volinsd said:
Not to step on GV's toes here, but socialism isnt funding nor had any part in the military jack. Sure, taxpayers have paid for military personnel and equipment, but the framers of our country along with the rest of the population knew it was needed and MOST would give freely to that notion even today. Its called patriotism and security.

Patriots know this.

Now socialism on the other hand is taking one persons things and distributing it to any lazy jackwagon who wont work. Only idiots cant see the problems with this "idea".

Now....if you don't think paying brave americans to do things that others are too afraid or selfish to do, in order to protect you and your family.....you just need to GTFO!

Seriously...just leave the country that is so bad in your mind and go check out some other ones until you find that perfect socialist utopia you dream of.
Click to expand...

686 billion worth of security (2019)
2.4 trillion to "liberate" Iraq so democracy could flower in the Mideast.. .ya..amurca!
Patriotism really is the last refuge of scoundrels... anyway I hear the 4th should be a humdinger in d.c. ---donny boy planning the shindig
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top