Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTOP)   Good news, everybody. The mega-rich's net worth increased from $1.7 trillion to $2 trillion last year, which means there's gonna be a lot more cash money trickling down to the rest of us very soon   (wtop.com) divider line 469
    More: Cool, rises, T. Boone Pickens, Microsoft Corp., Dustin Moskovitz, Hyatt Hotel, Larry Ellison  
•       •       •

2471 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Sep 2013 at 7:52 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



469 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-17 07:55:34 AM  
Say, that *is* good news....for Obama.

/someone had to
 
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM  
/Oblig

nacla.org
 
2013-09-17 07:57:00 AM  
Can't wait to feel the warmth of the liquid gold.
 
2013-09-17 07:58:49 AM  
I'm going to buy some chewing gum with my share.
 
2013-09-17 08:01:31 AM  
I think I feel something trickling down right now...
 
2013-09-17 08:01:51 AM  
Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?
 
2013-09-17 08:03:34 AM  

Katolu: Can't wait to feel the warmth of the liquid gold.


content.animalnewyork.com
 
2013-09-17 08:06:30 AM  
For what it's worth, if you liquidated all that cash and redistributed to the entire US population (350M) that would be a payment of $142 a year for the next 40 years (in 2013 dollars.)  Or a single payment of $5714 ... to EVERY person in the US.
 
2013-09-17 08:06:59 AM  
THANKS A LOT FARTZER0
 
2013-09-17 08:07:43 AM  

DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?


Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!
 
2013-09-17 08:07:50 AM  

DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?


Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

I guess the politics of envy will always be effective.


/strangely, it works just as well for limousine liberals


Glad to see the uberwealthy's white knights have shown up to defend the indefensible. BTW guys- no matter how much you shill for them, they aren't going to invite you to their club.
 
2013-09-17 08:07:52 AM  

Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).


because we're not willfully ignorant of history?
 
2013-09-17 08:08:52 AM  

DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?


Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?
 
2013-09-17 08:08:54 AM  
and yet another jealousy thread
 
2013-09-17 08:12:47 AM  
Revolutionaries with no revolution will create one.
 
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM  
My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.
 
2013-09-17 08:13:13 AM  

Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).


Because, don't you see? In order for those rich folk to get richer, they literally had to take from the poor. There's simply no other way to acquire wealth since there's only so much cash in circulation. Cash money gets its value because of its scarcity, ergo, derp.
 
2013-09-17 08:14:56 AM  
Can you 3D-print a guillotine?
 
2013-09-17 08:15:42 AM  
universalrover.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-17 08:15:53 AM  

Aristocles: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

Because, don't you see? In order for those rich folk to get richer, they literally had to take from the poor. There's simply no other way to acquire wealth since there's only so much cash in circulation. Cash money gets its value because of its scarcity, ergo, derp.


The cash has been printed and deposited directly in the accounts of rich people. They aren't literally taking it from the poor but the poor will be hurt the most when their few dollars are worth less.
 
2013-09-17 08:16:04 AM  
HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig

Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.
 
2013-09-17 08:16:27 AM  

Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread


The wealthy are stealing money from the poor (yes in many cases it should be labelled as actual theft), shipping jobs overseas after maxing out the debt on the people in this country thereby limiting the ability to repay. I don't think think you can call that jealousy.

People are being finacially farked and hard. I think alot of it has to do with the debt collection agencies and their relationship to the companies they represent. It's more money for all if it goes thru DC.
 
2013-09-17 08:17:22 AM  

OnlyM3: HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig
Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.


So, you think that the bad economy of the late 80s is because of Bush sr.?   lol  oh god, it burns.
 
2013-09-17 08:18:40 AM  

badhatharry: Revolutionaries with no revolution will create one.


Isn't that the way they all start?
 
2013-09-17 08:19:15 AM  
doublesecretprobation


Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

That's demonstrably false.
 
2013-09-17 08:19:46 AM  
www.jesus-is-savior.com
 
2013-09-17 08:20:01 AM  

Infernalist: OnlyM3: HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig
Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.

So, you think that the bad economy of the late 80s is because of Bush sr.?   lol  oh god, it burns.


Hyper conservatism can never be wrong.
 
2013-09-17 08:20:52 AM  
regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth
 
2013-09-17 08:22:03 AM  
Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.
 
2013-09-17 08:22:09 AM  

Strik3r: Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread

The wealthy are stealing money from the poor (yes in many cases it should be labelled as actual theft), shipping jobs overseas after maxing out the debt on the people in this country thereby limiting the ability to repay. I don't think think you can call that jealousy.

People are being finacially farked and hard. I think alot of it has to do with the debt collection agencies and their relationship to the companies they represent. It's more money for all if it goes thru DC.


Maybe you should fill out a police report
 
2013-09-17 08:22:18 AM  

baufan2005
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM


My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.

Don't worry, you have hope and change.

A slogan to placate the dumbmasses, because actions are harrrrrd.
Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Too bad Facts are bannable offenses on fark.
 
2013-09-17 08:24:18 AM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


Sure we can.
 
2013-09-17 08:24:43 AM  

OnlyM3: baufan2005
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM


My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.
Don't worry, you have hope and change.

A slogan to placate the dumbmasses, because actions are harrrrrd.
Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Too bad Facts are bannable offenses on fark.


What was it in Decmember 2008?
 
2013-09-17 08:24:51 AM  
ok nevermind. the crazy has expanded to fill all available space. abandon thread
 
2013-09-17 08:25:13 AM  
Infernalist
2013-09-17 08:14:56 AM


Can you 3D-print a guillotine?

Peaceful liberals calling for murder. Must be a day that ends with a 'y".
 
2013-09-17 08:25:34 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Infernalist: OnlyM3: HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig
Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.

So, you think that the bad economy of the late 80s is because of Bush sr.?   lol  oh god, it burns.

Hyper conservatism can never be wrong.


What we need is 20 straight years of Democratic control of the WH and congress.  No more of this '8 years and hand off' bullshiat.  We need a solid decade of Democratic control of the government so that we can 'see' what can come of it.  And then let the American people decide if the GOP alternatives are better or not.

Because right now, it's stupid.  We let the GOP fark things up with foreign wars and obscene tax cuts and cronyism and all but open bribery in the government at the highest level...and when shiat goes south, they throw up a lamb to be slaughtered after 8 years and the Democrats take over.

Democrats spend 8 years fixing the GOP fark ups and disasters and get us out of the wars and the whole time, the GOP is snarking and complaining about how the Democrats aren't fixing things fast enough.  And at the end of the 8 years, they talk about integrity of the office and how corrupt the Democrats are and weak on crime and our enemies are laughing at us...etc etc etc...

And we vote them back in and they go right back to provoking foreign wars and looting the government for as much as they can, and we continually have the unmitigated gall to act SURPRISED.

fark that.  2016 needs to be the point where we give the Democrats another 8 years in the WH.
 
2013-09-17 08:25:58 AM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth



Not any more. Today's wealth is mostly virtual: Tokens in a mutually agreed upon accounting system.
Aside from real estate, the visual trappings of wealth are mostly just the toys of the wealthy.
 
2013-09-17 08:27:07 AM  
DONAHUE: When you see around the globe the maldistribution of wealth, the desperate plight of millions of people in underdeveloped countries, when you see so few haves and so many have-nots, when you see the greed and the concentration of power, did you ever have a moment of doubt about capitalism and whether greed's a good idea to run on?

FRIEDMAN: Well, first of all, tell me, is there some society you know that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? Of course none of us are greedy. It's only the other fellow who's greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn't construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn't revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you're talking about, the only cases in recorded history are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worst off, it's exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear that there is no alternative way, so far discovered, of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.

and yet, some still refuse to see.
/hearing what they want to hear, knowing only what they heard
 
2013-09-17 08:27:08 AM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth



Didn't get that memo:

i28.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-17 08:28:09 AM  

Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?


Your contempt for the 'born on 3rd base, think they hit a triple crowd' is warranted.  Believing that hard work doesn't produce results just stupid.

You're batting .500
 
2013-09-17 08:28:26 AM  
I assume all of you frown when your 401ks increase in value because of the stock market. Oh way, pot, kettle....
 
2013-09-17 08:29:19 AM  

Joe Blowme: Strik3r: Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread

The wealthy are stealing money from the poor (yes in many cases it should be labelled as actual theft), shipping jobs overseas after maxing out the debt on the people in this country thereby limiting the ability to repay. I don't think think you can call that jealousy.

People are being finacially farked and hard. I think alot of it has to do with the debt collection agencies and their relationship to the companies they represent. It's more money for all if it goes thru DC.

Maybe you should fill out a police report


Kinda hopeless when they are bought out already. I'm not talking about the cops. I'm talking about the legal system......................
 
2013-09-17 08:29:39 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!


In part, yes. People have consistently voted to abdicate personal responsibility onto the shoulders of others. Those others have taken extreme advantage of their position. That is human nature, and is, in part, caused by laziness.
 
2013-09-17 08:29:39 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-17 08:29:39 AM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


Publicly Funded Elections
Plurality Voting
Remove the 535 Member limit on Congress
 
2013-09-17 08:30:01 AM  
There's a line that you can't push people past.  They're getting close to that line.
 
2013-09-17 08:31:26 AM  

netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.


And yet we have one of the lowest individual and corporate tax burdens in the developed world.
So maybe the problem isn't bloated government.
 
2013-09-17 08:32:46 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!


In my case, laziness has and will continue to hold me back on the wealth accumulation track.  That's a fact.
 
2013-09-17 08:32:51 AM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

Your contempt for the 'born on 3rd base, think they hit a triple crowd' is warranted.  Believing that hard work doesn't produce results just stupid.

You're batting .500


I didn't say hard work doesn't procude results, I said working harder turn into increased rewards.  Increased rewards generally take opportunity and options.  Just working harder doesn't cut it.
 
2013-09-17 08:33:01 AM  

untaken_name: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!

In part, yes. People have consistently voted to abdicate personal responsibility onto the shoulders of others. Those others have taken extreme advantage of their position. That is human nature, and is, in part, caused by laziness.


Provide some examples.
 
2013-09-17 08:33:37 AM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!

In my case, laziness has and will continue to hold me back on the wealth accumulation track.  That's a fact.


Cool.
 
2013-09-17 08:33:48 AM  

Jorn the Younger: You're batting .500

I didn't say hard work doesn't procude results, I said working harder doesn't turn into increased rewards. Increased rewards generally take opportunity and options. Just working harder doesn't cut it.


/need to stop skipping preview
 
2013-09-17 08:33:52 AM  

Lady J: what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


I wish I was so sheltered that I had never heard of "robbery" or "home invasion". That would be really nice.
 
2013-09-17 08:35:08 AM  

give me doughnuts: netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.

And yet we have one of the lowest individual and corporate tax burdens in the developed world.
So maybe the problem isn't bloated government.


Because spending 1.30 times what you take in is not a problem? Leaving a debt so large it will consume your descendants isn't a problem? Geez, what do you consider to be a problem?
 
2013-09-17 08:35:17 AM  

Thunderpipes: I assume all of you frown when your 401ks increase in value because of the stock market. Oh way, pot, kettle....


I would rather get a raise than unrealistic increases in numbers on paper. I'll believe in my 401K when they show me the money.
 
2013-09-17 08:37:12 AM  

OnlyM3: baufan2005
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM


My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.
Don't worry, you have hope and change.

A slogan to placate the dumbmasses, because actions are harrrrrd.
Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Too bad Facts are bannable offenses on fark.


Yeah, you're right, the better the wealthy are doing the worse off the lower class is:

upload.wikimedia.org

www.pewresearch.org

Thanks for making the case.
 
2013-09-17 08:39:29 AM  

untaken_name: Lady J: what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

I wish I was so sheltered that I had never heard of "robbery" or "home invasion". That would be really nice.


what are these outlandish concepts? my empty little head is whirling!

don't be thick. robbery and home invasion are illegal, anything you get that way you're not going to be allowed to keep.

the adults are talking about sustainable change
 
2013-09-17 08:39:38 AM  

forcebender: For what it's worth, if you liquidated all that cash and redistributed to the entire US population (350M) that would be a payment of $142 a year for the next 40 years (in 2013 dollars.)  Or a single payment of $5714 ... to EVERY person in the US.


That's a terrible idea. Take it all to a casino, you can double the money EASY! If you don't well then you just made one casino owner very rich, and since you previously took the money from loads of people it should be easier to take it from him, and try again.

It's like an infinite money cheat. Pay off that debt in no time, give yourself a healthy surplus to invest in industry to make yourself self sustaining so you don't need a trade deficit!
 
2013-09-17 08:41:39 AM  
Farkin rich people.

That money should be given to really poor people, who deserve it far more.
 
2013-09-17 08:41:59 AM  

OnlyM3: baufan2005
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM


My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.
Don't worry, you have hope and change.

A slogan to placate the dumbmasses, because actions are harrrrrd.
Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Too bad Facts are bannable offenses on fark.


What do these facts have to do with this anecdotal example of the rich stealing from the poor?
 
2013-09-17 08:42:22 AM  

Lady J: untaken_name: Lady J: what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

I wish I was so sheltered that I had never heard of "robbery" or "home invasion". That would be really nice.

what are these outlandish concepts? my empty little head is whirling!

don't be thick. robbery and home invasion are illegal, anything you get that way you're not going to be allowed to keep.

the adults are talking about sustainable change


You push a people far enough and they'll make sustainable change in a most direct fashion.  They'll decide that the current set of laws have failed them, they'll set aside those laws, and they'll rectify the situation in the most base and primal of ways.  By force.  It's happened over and over and over again, down through history, when a people get pushed too far by those on top.  And time and time again, those on top don't pay attention to history and act all shocked when they get drug down from the top and get killed and their stuff taken.

And just like that line in Armageddon, it's not a matter of 'if' it'll happen again, it's just a matter of 'when.'
 
2013-09-17 08:43:17 AM  

forcebender: For what it's worth, if you liquidated all that cash and redistributed to the entire US population (350M) that would be a payment of $142 a year for the next 40 years (in 2013 dollars.)  Or a single payment of $5714 ... to EVERY person in the US.


FWIW, if you taxed that original portion at 1960's rates with exemptions, and paid for infrastructure / research like our grandparents did, our children's children would lead better lives as well.

Of course, the 1980's f*cked that idea over. Invest in the future? Pfft!
 
2013-09-17 08:44:49 AM  
Inflation
 
2013-09-17 08:45:27 AM  
How is Bill Gates still so rich when he keeps giving it all away? What if he's not really giving anything away? :O
 
2013-09-17 08:45:34 AM  

Lady J: ok nevermind. the crazy has expanded to fill all available space. abandon thread


That was fast.
 
2013-09-17 08:46:02 AM  
However, we've collected record taxes, so there's that.
 
2013-09-17 08:46:43 AM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


It happens all the time. It's called "Illegal Forclosure" and banks have gotten richer, and nobody goes to jail for it. EVERYONE WINS!

Except for the poor people who lost their house, but who gives a flying fark about them anyway?
 
2013-09-17 08:49:57 AM  
Probably just an effect of all those new rich people that won the lottery, right?
What's the powerball at?
 
2013-09-17 08:50:23 AM  

Bareefer Obonghit: OnlyM3: baufan2005
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM


My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.
Don't worry, you have hope and change.

A slogan to placate the dumbmasses, because actions are harrrrrd.
Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Too bad Facts are bannable offenses on fark.

Yeah, you're right, the better the wealthy are doing the worse off the lower class is:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 800x588]

[www.pewresearch.org image 420x446]

Thanks for making the case.


There are also other factors involved in black unemployment, though I would leave it to an unemployment economist to discuss. I'm just a regular one.
 
2013-09-17 08:51:08 AM  

Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).


It's not just liberals.  Much of that money is has been completely removed from the economy, which hurts everyone.
 
2013-09-17 08:51:41 AM  
It is not the fault of the wealthy, that people did not read the fine print.

Trickle Down starts in the year 2385.
 
2013-09-17 08:51:43 AM  
I thought Barry was going to punish the evil rich, not make them richer. Where's my stuff? I want some stuff!
 
2013-09-17 08:52:13 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: untaken_name: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!

In part, yes. People have consistently voted to abdicate personal responsibility onto the shoulders of others. Those others have taken extreme advantage of their position. That is human nature, and is, in part, caused by laziness.

Provide some examples.


The Walton family.

The Koch brothers
 
2013-09-17 08:52:14 AM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.
 
2013-09-17 08:53:54 AM  
Infernalist:
You push a people far enough and they'll make sustainable change in a most direct fashion.  They'll decide that the current set of laws have failed them, they'll set aside those laws, and they'll rectify the situation in the most base and primal of ways.  By force.  It's happened over and over and over again, down through history, when a people get pushed too far by those on top.  And time and time again, those on top don't pay attention to history and act all shocked when they get drug down from the top and get killed and their stuff taken.

And just like that line in Armageddon, it's not a matter of 'if' it'll happen again, it's just a matter of 'when.'


given how there's hardly any guns in america, and everyone's so sensible with the ones they do have, it sounds like it should be a fairly straightforward and peaceable process
 
2013-09-17 08:54:12 AM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth



Well there's really 2 options. We can do it sanely through taxation as we transition to a post-work society as machines are replacing human labour every day...

Or we could have a violent and bloody revolution when the poor get squeezed so much they finally take all that ammo they've been hoarding and destroy every mansion they see.

Which would you prefer?
 
2013-09-17 08:54:20 AM  
Look I understand that if everyone became rich at once, there would be no one to do the tasks necessary to keep society going.  But I just can't wrap my head around the fact how far I am from the top.  I mean if Bill Gates made $100K a year to my 50K, I could swallow it better (halfway to the top!)  But to not be within 6 zeroes of people just blows my mind.
 
2013-09-17 08:55:49 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

It's not just liberals.  Much of that money is has been completely removed from the economy, which hurts everyone.


Not nearly so much as people think.
 
2013-09-17 08:55:58 AM  

Lady J: Infernalist:
You push a people far enough and they'll make sustainable change in a most direct fashion.  They'll decide that the current set of laws have failed them, they'll set aside those laws, and they'll rectify the situation in the most base and primal of ways.  By force.  It's happened over and over and over again, down through history, when a people get pushed too far by those on top.  And time and time again, those on top don't pay attention to history and act all shocked when they get drug down from the top and get killed and their stuff taken.

And just like that line in Armageddon, it's not a matter of 'if' it'll happen again, it's just a matter of 'when.'

given how there's hardly any guns in america, and everyone's so sensible with the ones they do have, it sounds like it should be a fairly straightforward and peaceable process


No, it'll be a bloody mess.  But it'll happen.  They're pushing people into a corner and getting fairly open about how they just don't give a shiat.  We're not there yet, but we're getting closer.
 
2013-09-17 08:57:47 AM  
If there was only 10 dollars in the entire world and it cost a dollar a day to live and I kept 9 of the dollars in a safe and only let you have access to one of the dollars, you would earn the dollar in a day then have to give it to me to pay for your food etc (which costs me 50 cents) so I print another dollar every two days because that is my `profit` which makes your dollar worth a little less each day so even if you save some it costs that much more to buy your food, pay rent etc so you never get out of poverty.

This is the world we live in except scaled up. It does not matter how hard you work, I control the money so I make damn well sure your work will not improve your life, only mine.

In what way am I *not* being a coont to you?  In what way is the situation *not* my fault?
 
2013-09-17 08:58:12 AM  
If hard work really = better pay, then illegal immigrants should be sitting on piles of cash by now.
 
2013-09-17 08:58:31 AM  
What has actually happened is that the efforts of the middle and lower classes have been funneled into the pockets of the top due to reductions in benefits, hours and cost of living wage increases. And the only thing that's going to trickle down, the only thing that's been passed down for about three decades now, is the inflation.
 
2013-09-17 08:59:25 AM  

ltdanman44: [i.imgur.com image 600x471]


i know right?
 
2013-09-17 09:00:44 AM  

VendorXeno: What has actually happened is that the efforts of the middle and lower classes have been funneled into the pockets of the top due to reductions in benefits, hours and cost of living wage increases. And the only thing that's going to trickle down, the only thing that's been passed down for about three decades now, is the inflation.


Don't forget about the tripling of worker efficiency thanks to technology, so one person now does the work of three, for less pay.
 
2013-09-17 09:01:06 AM  

maddogdelta: HotWingConspiracy: untaken_name: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!

In part, yes. People have consistently voted to abdicate personal responsibility onto the shoulders of others. Those others have taken extreme advantage of their position. That is human nature, and is, in part, caused by laziness.

Provide some examples.

The Walton family.

The Koch brothers


What personal responsibilities did people abdicate that these people took advantage of to accumulate wealth?
 
2013-09-17 09:01:10 AM  

Neighborhood Watch: You know, posting comments on Fark.com doesn't pay.

What's amazing is how many liberals will sit here and do it all day long... while complaining about how 'unfair' it is that they're broke.


/wasting time on Fark is DEFINITELY not a job that's been shipped overseas


static.giantbomb.com
 
2013-09-17 09:01:11 AM  

Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.


see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click
 
2013-09-17 09:01:37 AM  

Ricardo Klement: Bareefer Obonghit: OnlyM3: baufan2005
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM


My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.
Don't worry, you have hope and change.

A slogan to placate the dumbmasses, because actions are harrrrrd.
Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Too bad Facts are bannable offenses on fark.

Yeah, you're right, the better the wealthy are doing the worse off the lower class is:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 800x588]

[www.pewresearch.org image 420x446]

Thanks for making the case.

There are also other factors involved in black unemployment, though I would leave it to an unemployment economist to discuss. I'm just a regular one.


Yeah, I just wanted to point out that any simple argument he can make using blanket statements like that can be argued against using the same useless methods.
 
2013-09-17 09:02:25 AM  
Many years ago a wise man said that you either have to eliminate poverty for the masses or eliminate democracy for the masses because in a properly democratic society where the majority is poor they would just vote to take the money from the rich.

As this has not happened and in fact seems completely improbable I will let you draw your own conclusion as to the level of democracy in the United States...
 
2013-09-17 09:02:39 AM  

Neighborhood Watch: You know, posting comments on Fark.com doesn't pay.

What's amazing is how many liberals will sit here and do it all day long... while complaining about how 'unfair' it is that they're broke.


/wasting time on Fark is DEFINITELY not a job that's been shipped overseas


Hey pot!  What's up kettle?  You're black!
 
2013-09-17 09:04:37 AM  

MithrandirBooga: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


Well there's really 2 options. We can do it sanely through taxation as we transition to a post-work society as machines are replacing human labour every day...

Or we could have a violent and bloody revolution when the poor get squeezed so much they finally take all that ammo they've been hoarding and destroy every mansion they see.

Which would you prefer?


Give me you wallet all nice like or i will stab you and take it. Thugery at its finest... or as its know to tards "social justice"
 
2013-09-17 09:06:06 AM  
It's trickle up poverty.
 
2013-09-17 09:06:23 AM  

Lady J: Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.

see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click


Also, DO put a hard limit on individual wealth gain. Peg it to the minimum wage to give them an incentive to increase that...

fark your american dream that lets a few people ruin the world for the rest of us.
 
2013-09-17 09:06:48 AM  

dready zim: Many years ago a wise man said that you either have to eliminate poverty for the masses or eliminate democracy for the masses because in a properly democratic society where the majority is poor they would just vote to take the money from the rich.

As this has not happened and in fact seems completely improbable I will let you draw your own conclusion as to the level of democracy in the United States...


Democratic republics, how do they work?
 
2013-09-17 09:08:50 AM  

Joe Blowme: MithrandirBooga: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


Well there's really 2 options. We can do it sanely through taxation as we transition to a post-work society as machines are replacing human labour every day...

Or we could have a violent and bloody revolution when the poor get squeezed so much they finally take all that ammo they've been hoarding and destroy every mansion they see.

Which would you prefer?

Give me you wallet all nice like or i will stab you and take it. Thugery at its finest... or as its know to tards "social justice"


Just stop engineering the economic situation to screw over everyone except the very rich and we can start talking. That or we cut you until you tell us where the money is. Your choice.
 
2013-09-17 09:08:52 AM  

Lady J: Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.

see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click


Well thank you
 
2013-09-17 09:09:04 AM  
At this point...


i40.tinypic.com
 
2013-09-17 09:09:31 AM  

Joe Blowme: dready zim: Many years ago a wise man said that you either have to eliminate poverty for the masses or eliminate democracy for the masses because in a properly democratic society where the majority is poor they would just vote to take the money from the rich.

As this has not happened and in fact seems completely improbable I will let you draw your own conclusion as to the level of democracy in the United States...

Democratic republics, how do they work?


Badly.
 
2013-09-17 09:09:35 AM  

Lady J: untaken_name: Lady J: what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

I wish I was so sheltered that I had never heard of "robbery" or "home invasion". That would be really nice.

what are these outlandish concepts? my empty little head is whirling!

don't be thick. robbery and home invasion are illegal, anything you get that way you're not going to be allowed to keep.

the adults are talking about sustainable change


So wordy! It seems you have forgotten about history and it's tendency to repeat itself.
 
2013-09-17 09:09:47 AM  

dready zim: Lady J: Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.

see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click

Also, DO put a hard limit on individual wealth gain. Peg it to the minimum wage to give them an incentive to increase that...

fark your american dream that lets a few people ruin the world for the rest of us.


Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works
 
2013-09-17 09:11:02 AM  

Aristocles: In order for those rich folk to get richer, they literally had to take from the poor.


This is a true statement you farking troll.
 
2013-09-17 09:13:19 AM  

Joe Blowme: dready zim: Lady J: Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.

see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click

Also, DO put a hard limit on individual wealth gain. Peg it to the minimum wage to give them an incentive to increase that...

fark your american dream that lets a few people ruin the world for the rest of us.

Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works


Success built on the hard work of others deserves punishment. It would work better if we rewarded hard work, not your ability to screw over others.

How you get your success matters. A lot.
 
2013-09-17 09:13:31 AM  

Erebus1954: It's trickle up poverty.


Hmmmmmm, *flipping pages in anatomy book*  .  .  .  pretty sure the Urethra is a one way thing.
 
2013-09-17 09:13:47 AM  

Joe Blowme: Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works


Wanna know how I know you are not part of the successful crowd you're white knighting?
 
2013-09-17 09:13:49 AM  

Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?


Is this the thread where people have no job creativity and expect to make millions as a cubicle drone?
 
2013-09-17 09:14:29 AM  
IMO you gotta increase the minimum wage and possibly add some more tax brackets at the top. But at least increase the minimum wage... I know republicans/conservatives are fine with subsidizing wal-mart and mcdonalds profits with their tax money but I ain't.
 
2013-09-17 09:16:14 AM  

dready zim: Many years ago a wise man said that you either have to eliminate poverty for the masses or eliminate democracy for the masses because in a properly democratic society where the majority is poor they would just vote to take the money from the rich.

As this has not happened and in fact seems completely improbable I will let you draw your own conclusion as to the level of democracy in the United States...


The drooling masses of poor have been convinced to vote to give more money to the wealthy because they, too, might be wealthy one day?

Mob rule is a beautiful thing.
 
2013-09-17 09:16:44 AM  
Don't worry everyone, they'll pay their fair share. We know this for sure because the last really rich Republican guy to run for president was so transparent about how it all works:

i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-17 09:17:17 AM  

Madbassist1: Joe Blowme: Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works

Wanna know how I know you are not part of the successful crowd you're white knighting?



because i dont use spell checker?
nikonites.com
 
2013-09-17 09:18:09 AM  

untaken_name: give me doughnuts: netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.

And yet we have one of the lowest individual and corporate tax burdens in the developed world.
So maybe the problem isn't bloated government.

Because spending 1.30 times what you take in is not a problem? Leaving a debt so large it will consume your descendants isn't a problem? Geez, what do you consider to be a problem?



Obviously, taxes are too low, and government spending is too high in specific areas.
Raise taxes in the upper brackets to the levels they were in the Clinton years and cut Defense spending by a third (or more).

That'll get things started.
 
2013-09-17 09:21:05 AM  

doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?


Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?
 
2013-09-17 09:22:47 AM  

dready zim: Joe Blowme: dready zim: Lady J: Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.

see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click

Also, DO put a hard limit on individual wealth gain. Peg it to the minimum wage to give them an incentive to increase that...

fark your american dream that lets a few people ruin the world for the rest of us.

Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works

Success built on the hard work of others deserves punishment. It would work better if we rewarded hard work, not your ability to screw over others.

How you get your success matters. A lot.


But it is ok to just take it from those whom you feel didnt "earn it" properly?  If they break the law aquiring it, im with you. If they did not, i can not.
 
2013-09-17 09:22:50 AM  

Carousel Beast: doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?


99.6% of "poor" people own a refrigerator, so it's working pretty good.
 
2013-09-17 09:22:55 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!


Wealth inequality isn't the issue. A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich. And the poor, despite the saying, aren't getting poorer; they're getting richer.
 
2013-09-17 09:25:05 AM  

DeathByGeekSquad: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

Is this the thread where people have no job creativity and expect to make millions as a cubicle drone?


This is the thread where certain people who are doing just fine themselves TYVM, remind the droolers and the knuckle draggers that historically, both in our country and in others, this type of wealth inequality has led to massive financial upheaval at best (Great Depression, many other financial Panics), and at worst to violent revolution (French, Russian, Mexican et al).  There are reasonable, pragmatic steps we can take, which we had in place at various times in the last 100 years when our country was doing better than it is now, which would help to set things on a more equal footing in the future.  But go ahead and pretend like the only thing going on here is jealousy.
 
2013-09-17 09:25:47 AM  

DrPainMD: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!

Wealth inequality isn't the issue.


Right, it's that 99% of the nation is lazy.

 
2013-09-17 09:27:03 AM  

DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.


Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.
 
2013-09-17 09:28:15 AM  

give me doughnuts: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


Not any more. Today's wealth is mostly virtual: Tokens in a mutually agreed upon accounting system.
Aside from real estate, the visual trappings of wealth are mostly just the toys of the wealthy.


So basically what we need is fight club....
 
2013-09-17 09:30:07 AM  

Carn: DeathByGeekSquad: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

Is this the thread where people have no job creativity and expect to make millions as a cubicle drone?

This is the thread where certain people who are doing just fine themselves TYVM, remind the droolers and the knuckle draggers that historically, both in our country and in others, this type of wealth inequality has led to massive financial upheaval at best (Great Depression, many other financial Panics), and at worst to violent revolution (French, Russian, Mexican et al).  There are reasonable, pragmatic steps we can take, which we had in place at various times in the last 100 years when our country was doing better than it is now, which would help to set things on a more equal footing in the future.  But go ahead and pretend like the only thing going on here is jealousy.


Go ahead and highlight specifically where I brought jealousy into the equation.

In the meantime, take a moment to consider the possibility that the reason some folks get mired in financial woe is because of their own decisions, not the cards that life handed them.  The psychologists who are better suited for corporate psychology but insist on attempting to get jobs in private care, resulting in constant rejection and failure with massing debt.  The aforementioned office drones who wouldn't recognize a glass ceiling if it smacked them repeatedly in the head.

Somewhere along the line, our nation became obsessed with the idea of working in a corporate environment, toiling away for the greater good.  This has created a bottleneck.  This is where job creativity pays dividends.  Explore professions outside of the regular grind.
 
2013-09-17 09:30:30 AM  

DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.


A middle class person is poorer because someone else is rich though, it hurts middle class people the most to subsidize walmart's profits with taxes paid on social services to bring their employees up to a living wage.
 
2013-09-17 09:31:02 AM  

Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.


Right, what has happened is that given two people, a rich person and a poor person, and given that at the beginning of the financial crisis the rich person had 10$ and the poor person had 1$, and given that the Fed created 10$ of new wealth, the rich person now has 19$ and the poor person has 2$.

So yeah, the poor are getting poorer as the rich get richer...
 
2013-09-17 09:31:17 AM  

Joe Blowme: Madbassist1: Joe Blowme: Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works

Wanna know how I know you are not part of the successful crowd you're white knighting?


because i dont use spell checker?
[nikonites.com image 750x600]


because it shows you do not follow the seven key habits of the rich and famous.
 
2013-09-17 09:32:06 AM  

Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.


Rich people don't employ poor people!

beechwoodperiodsix.edublogs.org
 
2013-09-17 09:33:10 AM  
www.quotesparade.com
 
2013-09-17 09:34:12 AM  
im not sure i buy this whole violent revolution thing

i might be smart enough to work out who 'owes' me money in this unequal situation, and even how to get it, but im not going to do anything violent to get it, because it's not in me

conversely, someone who is prepared to get their hands dirty, is less likely to understand what they're doing. they'll probably just be violent, not achievemuch, and just make the inequality worse
 
2013-09-17 09:34:45 AM  

chitlenz: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Right, what has happened is that given two people, a rich person and a poor person, and given that at the beginning of the financial crisis the rich person had 10$ and the poor person had 1$, and given that the Fed created 10$ of new wealth, the rich person now has 19$ and the poor person has 2$.

So yeah, the poor are getting poorer as the rich get richer...


In your example the poor guy doubled their money while the rich less than doubled theirs, in reality, with the new taxes, increased cost of living etc the poor guy still only has a dollar but the rich now have 19 instead of 9...
 
2013-09-17 09:34:53 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Rich people don't employ poor people!

[beechwoodperiodsix.edublogs.org image 257x196]


They employ them at wages so low that their company has policies to assist their employees with getting welfare. It's almost like you're retarded.
 
2013-09-17 09:36:17 AM  
Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.
 
2013-09-17 09:37:43 AM  
Everything happens for a reason and sometimes that reason is that a person with more power, money and influence than you decides it will be that way so that the status quo is maintained and they keep getting richer relative to you.

The only way to have rich people is to make poor people. People mostly work hard so you will have to engineer the system to keep them down.
 
2013-09-17 09:38:32 AM  

Marcintosh: Erebus1954: It's trickle up poverty.

Hmmmmmm, *flipping pages in anatomy book*  .  .  .  pretty sure the Urethra is a one way thing.


Tell that to the candiru.
 
2013-09-17 09:39:05 AM  
There was a reason that socialism, anarchism, and even communism were popular and growing ideologies starting in the late 19th century until the New Deal. I wonder how many people here complaining of wealth redistribution to the bottom have even heard of Eugene V. Debs.

The thing about history is that the wealth will be redistributed one way or another once society reaches a breaking point. The rich get too greedy, they can either give some of their disproportionate wealth away (a la FDR) while keeping their position in society or lose everything (including their lives) in a violent revolution.
 
2013-09-17 09:39:19 AM  

Joe Blowme: Madbassist1: Joe Blowme: Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works

Wanna know how I know you are not part of the successful crowd you're white knighting?


because i dont use spell checker?
[nikonites.com image 750x600]


I don't use spell checker either. I proofread on my own. Most successful people do.
 
2013-09-17 09:39:22 AM  

lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.


You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?
 
2013-09-17 09:40:29 AM  

dready zim: chitlenz: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Right, what has happened is that given two people, a rich person and a poor person, and given that at the beginning of the financial crisis the rich person had 10$ and the poor person had 1$, and given that the Fed created 10$ of new wealth, the rich person now has 19$ and the poor person has 2$.

So yeah, the poor are getting poorer as the rich get richer...

In your example the poor guy doubled their money while the rich less than doubled theirs, in reality, with the new taxes, increased cost of living etc the poor guy still only has a dollar but the rich now have 19 instead of 9...


You are right, the poor got effectively none of the TARP bailout or any of the resultant QE.  Essentially the entire bailout went to shareholders of large (mostly banking) companies while anyone not wealthy enough to hold investments got precisely nothing (or even worse, got laid off to maximize shareholder profits).  My question is, how much more will society put up with?   It comes down to a very small number of people in society holding all of us back.
 
2013-09-17 09:42:00 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Rich people don't employ poor people!

[beechwoodperiodsix.edublogs.org image 257x196]

They employ them at wages so low that their company has policies to assist their employees with getting welfare. It's almost like you're retarded.


Sorry champ, you're the retarded one here.  Look at my post a few more times.  Maybe ask someone to explain it to you.
 
2013-09-17 09:44:40 AM  

DeathByGeekSquad: Carn: DeathByGeekSquad: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

Is this the thread where people have no job creativity and expect to make millions as a cubicle drone?

This is the thread where certain people who are doing just fine themselves TYVM, remind the droolers and the knuckle draggers that historically, both in our country and in others, this type of wealth inequality has led to massive financial upheaval at best (Great Depression, many other financial Panics), and at worst to violent revolution (French, Russian, Mexican et al).  There are reasonable, pragmatic steps we can take, which we had in place at various times in the last 100 years when our country was doing better than it is now, which would help to set things on a more equal footing in the future.  But go ahead and pretend like the only thing going on here is jealousy.

Go ahead and highlight specifically where I brought jealousy into the equation.

In the meantime, take a moment to consider the possibility that the reason some folks get mired in financial woe is because of their own decisions, not the cards that life handed them.  The psychologists who are better suited for corporate psychology but insist on attempting to get jobs in private care, resulting in constant rejection and failure with massing debt.  The aforementioned office drones who wouldn't recognize a glass ceiling if it smacked them repeatedly in the head.

Somewhere along the line, our nation became obsessed with the idea of working in a corporate environment, toiling away for the greater good.  This has created a bottleneck.  This is where job creativity pays dividends.  Explore professions outside of the regular grind.


There you go.  Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone?  You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument.  All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?  If you'd like to make a meaningful contribution to the discussion, perhaps you could explain why one or many of my suggestions for economic regulation should or shouldn't be implemented?

I'm approaching this from the pragmatic stance of "vast income inequality is an unstable economic situation and historically is bad for both those wealthy individuals and the country at large".  Feel free to argue against this point, but I will warn you that unless you're just playing devil's advocate, you risk looking very stupid.
 
2013-09-17 09:46:29 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Rich people don't employ poor people!

[beechwoodperiodsix.edublogs.org image 257x196]

They employ them at wages so low that their company has policies to assist their employees with getting welfare. It's almost like you're retarded.

Sorry champ, you're the retarded one here.  Look at my post a few more times.  Maybe ask someone to explain it to you.


Why not you? Explain how setting wages too low does *not* make people poor and you relatively richer (but not as absolutely rich as you would be paying better wages)?
 
2013-09-17 09:48:09 AM  

chitlenz: dready zim: chitlenz: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Right, what has happened is that given two people, a rich person and a poor person, and given that at the beginning of the financial crisis the rich person had 10$ and the poor person had 1$, and given that the Fed created 10$ of new wealth, the rich person now has 19$ and the poor person has 2$.

So yeah, the poor are getting poorer as the rich get richer...

In your example the poor guy doubled their money while the rich less than doubled theirs, in reality, with the new taxes, increased cost of living etc the poor guy still only has a dollar but the rich now have 19 instead of 9...

You are right, the poor got effectively none of the TARP bailout or any of the resultant QE.  Essentially the entire bailout went to shareholders of large (mostly banking) companies while anyone not wealthy enough to hold investments got precisely nothing (or even worse, got laid off to maximize shareholder profits).  My question is, how much more will society put up with?   It comes down to a very small number of people in society holding all of us back.


The largest shareholders of large companies are investment funds.  In other words most ordinary peoples pension funds.
 
2013-09-17 09:48:21 AM  

dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?


The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth.  Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.
 
2013-09-17 09:49:12 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Maybe ask someone to explain it to you.


I'll explain, walmart + tax money employs people at walmart.
 
2013-09-17 09:49:40 AM  

dready zim: BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Rich people don't employ poor people!

[beechwoodperiodsix.edublogs.org image 257x196]

They employ them at wages so low that their company has policies to assist their employees with getting welfare. It's almost like you're retarded.

Sorry champ, you're the retarded one here.  Look at my post a few more times.  Maybe ask someone to explain it to you.

Why not you? Explain how setting wages too low does *not* make people poor and you relatively richer (but not as absolutely rich as you would be paying better wages)?


Are you his alt?  Seriously, read my post.  Yeah, the post in which I included a farking picure of the walmart logo myself ffs.  My god, you people are beyond stupid.  You're just so blinded by hate for me at this point that you just see what you want to see.  And no, I won't explain it, at least not yet, because I do enjoy watching you make complete fools of yourselves.
 
2013-09-17 09:50:03 AM  

Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?


And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid
 
2013-09-17 09:53:56 AM  

Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid


You forgot the trust fund babies.  People love to have a go at them.
 
2013-09-17 09:55:55 AM  
Man I hate people who have achieved far more than me. Fark them, man.
 
2013-09-17 09:56:54 AM  
Putting aside who "deserves" what, an economy that's 70% reliant on consumer spending will not thrive and grow if all the gains from it go to a small percentage of people. There's no way to square that circle.
 
2013-09-17 10:01:33 AM  

Carn: Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.


That's a really bad idea. As wage indexation goes up, monetary policy is less and less capable of doing anything.

Let λ denote the proportion of wages indexed. If λ is positive,

Then πtt-1 =-(α/(1-λ))(ut-un)

As λ -> 1, and all contracts are indexed, ut=un at all times and monetary policy does nothing at all.

So the more contracts you index, the more inflation starts accelerating.
 
2013-09-17 10:02:52 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Putting aside who "deserves" what, an economy that's 70% reliant on consumer spending will not thrive and grow if all the gains from it go to a small percentage of people. There's no way to square that circle.


Putting oil in my car's engine is not fair, my car's engine doesn't deserve oil it's just trying to redistribute oil from my furnace. All it does with the oil is lubricate some parts not like my furnace who heats a whole house.
 
2013-09-17 10:05:31 AM  

Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid


Which is not even remotely my argument as stated just below my post that you quoted, but you decided to cut it out.  Keep on trollin Joe.
 
2013-09-17 10:07:49 AM  

Ricardo Klement: Carn: Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.

That's a really bad idea. As wage indexation goes up, monetary policy is less and less capable of doing anything.

Let λ denote the proportion of wages indexed. If λ is positive,

Then πt-πt-1 =-(α/(1-λ))(ut-un)

As λ -> 1, and all contracts are indexed, ut=un at all times and monetary policy does nothing at all.

So the more contracts you index, the more inflation starts accelerating.


Well it would be a really bad idea to do this AND to have a large lambda.  If a small percentage of people were earning the minimum wage, this wouldn't be a problem for monetary policy.
 
2013-09-17 10:07:53 AM  
doubled99: Man I hate people who have achieved far more than me  have rigged the system so that only a select few EVER had a chance. Fark them, man.

FTFM
 
2013-09-17 10:09:21 AM  

Carn: Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid

Which is not even remotely my argument as stated just below my post that you quoted, but you decided to cut it out.  Keep on trollin Joe.


If that is not what you are saying then why the hate for those who have more than you?
 
2013-09-17 10:10:10 AM  

Carn: Ricardo Klement: Carn: Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.

That's a really bad idea. As wage indexation goes up, monetary policy is less and less capable of doing anything.

Let λ denote the proportion of wages indexed. If λ is positive,

Then πt-πt-1 =-(α/(1-λ))(ut-un)

As λ -> 1, and all contracts are indexed, ut=un at all times and monetary policy does nothing at all.

So the more contracts you index, the more inflation starts accelerating.

Well it would be a really bad idea to do this AND to have a large lambda.  If a small percentage of people were earning the minimum wage, this wouldn't be a problem for monetary policy.


The only time people really start to talk about a minimum wage is when a large percentage of people are in that bracket.
 
2013-09-17 10:13:43 AM  

Carn: Ricardo Klement: Carn: Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.

That's a really bad idea. As wage indexation goes up, monetary policy is less and less capable of doing anything.

Let λ denote the proportion of wages indexed. If λ is positive,

Then πt-πt-1 =-(α/(1-λ))(ut-un)

As λ -> 1, and all contracts are indexed, ut=un at all times and monetary policy does nothing at all.

So the more contracts you index, the more inflation starts accelerating.

Well it would be a really bad idea to do this AND to have a large lambda.  If a small percentage of people were earning the minimum wage, this wouldn't be a problem for monetary policy.


We already have some lambdas that are built-in, and some that are not automatic but are effectively: COLA for government workers, for example, and some union contracts (those change frequently, though). Just the lambda difference between us and the EU had a substantial effect on inflation.

That having been said, I'm not against raising the current minimum wage, though not for economic reasons.
 
2013-09-17 10:14:57 AM  

marsoft: Carn: Ricardo Klement: Carn: Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.

That's a really bad idea. As wage indexation goes up, monetary policy is less and less capable of doing anything.

Let λ denote the proportion of wages indexed. If λ is positive,

Then πt-πt-1 =-(α/(1-λ))(ut-un)

As λ -> 1, and all contracts are indexed, ut=un at all times and monetary policy does nothing at all.

So the more contracts you index, the more inflation starts accelerating.

Well it would be a really bad idea to do this AND to have a large lambda.  If a small percentage of people were earning the minimum wage, this wouldn't be a problem for monetary policy.

The only time people really start to talk about a minimum wage is when a large percentage of people are in that bracket.


A saving grace is that contracts tend to get pegged to inflation a lot more when inflation is high. Luckily, inflation has been minuscule, so our lambda hasn't been very large.
 
2013-09-17 10:16:27 AM  
A few questions to redirect this thread as people are sounding angry and defensive on both sides:
1. What percentage of Americans are earning minimum wage?
2. What percentage of those are working at least 40 hours a week?
3. Do they have the basics?  Food security, heat, shelter?

If it is a large percentage covered by 1 and 2, and 3 is no, then there is a big problem.  How it can be addressed is another issue.
 
2013-09-17 10:16:59 AM  
Not unless we raise inflation to 5-8%. The problem right now is that firms and individuals are sitting on mountains, oceans, a veritable dragon's hoard of cash, because with inflation this low the opportunity cost of holding cash is less than the opportunity cost of spending it on capital or land.
 
2013-09-17 10:20:42 AM  

Joe Blowme: Carn: Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid

Which is not even remotely my argument as stated just below my post that you quoted, but you decided to cut it out.  Keep on trollin Joe.

If that is not what you are saying then why the hate for those who have more than you?



I think he's saying the same thing Dusk-You-n-Me was saying, you simply can't run an economy that relies on consumerism when all the wealth is being concentrated in the hands of few people. There's no hate in that, it's just the way it works.
 
2013-09-17 10:22:04 AM  

Slaves2Darkness: Not unless we raise inflation to 5-8%. The problem right now is that firms and individuals are sitting on mountains, oceans, a veritable dragon's hoard of cash, because with inflation this low the opportunity cost of holding cash is less than the opportunity cost of spending it on capital or land.


No.

They're not stuffing that money into mattresses.
 
2013-09-17 10:24:26 AM  

Joe Blowme: Carn: Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid

Which is not even remotely my argument as stated just below my post that you quoted, but you decided to cut it out.  Keep on trollin Joe.

If that is not what you are saying then why the hate for those who have more than you?


When did I say anything about hate?  I've said it a few times already, my stance is pragmatic.  Current conditions are historically bad both for the country at large and the individuals holding the vast quantities of wealth.  We should take steps that will narrow the gap in the future both in the form of reinstating higher taxes on the wealthy (rates that have been much higher than they are currently for close to 100 years) and in the form of pushing economic growth for the bottom and middle and the easiest, most obvious, and currently very necessary way to do that is to start a huge Infrastructure development program.
 
2013-09-17 10:26:42 AM  

Ricardo Klement: Slaves2Darkness: Not unless we raise inflation to 5-8%. The problem right now is that firms and individuals are sitting on mountains, oceans, a veritable dragon's hoard of cash, because with inflation this low the opportunity cost of holding cash is less than the opportunity cost of spending it on capital or land.

No.

They're not stuffing that money into mattresses.


it's being invested out of the country in emerging markets, the middle class subsidizes their profits and they take those profits and invest them in developing markets and tax shelters.
 
2013-09-17 10:27:34 AM  

lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth.  Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.



Let me explain to you what is currently happening in our world. This graph is a handy demonstration:

dissidentvoice.org

You will note that as our manufacturing output increases, the number of manufacturing jobs falls. Human beings are being replaced by machines. This is just manufacturing; the service sector is now making inroads in automating their jobs too. The population of the planet is increasing exponentially as well.

So, let's go back to economics class. The law of supply and demand, specifically.

When supply of an object goes up, the price goes down.
When demand of an object goes down, the price goes down.

These rules are universal and irrefutable.

So what happens when we start to introduce machines to replace human labour? The demand for human labor drops, and so does wages. What happens when the population continues to grow exponentially? The supply of human labor goes up, causing wages to further collapse.

We're nearing the point in human history where the supply of labour will be so high and the demand for labour will be so low that the effective market price of that labour will be Zero.

What in the actual fark do you think is going to happen when that happens?


I'm not a socialist because I want to steal your money. Chances are, I make more than you. I'm a socialist because I have a brain and understand what is happening in the world today.
 
2013-09-17 10:31:04 AM  

Carn: Joe Blowme: Carn: Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid

Which is not even remotely my argument as stated just below my post that you quoted, but you decided to cut it out.  Keep on trollin Joe.

If that is not what you are saying then why the hate for those who have more than you?

When did I say anything about hate?  I've said it a few times already, my stance is pragmatic.  Current conditions are historically bad both for the country at large and the individuals holding the vast quantities of wealth.  We should take steps that will narrow the gap in the future both in the form of reinstating higher taxes on the wealthy (rates that have been much higher than they are currently for close to 100 years) and in the form of pushing economic growth for the bottom and middle and the easiest, most obvious, and currently very necessary way to do that is to start a huge Infrastructure development program.


Part of the problem is that any system that allows merit to be rewarded and allows some proportion of wealth to be reinvested and some proportion passed-on to future generations is a system wherein wealth converges. Free Market systems will certainly have wealth convergence be a marked feature.
 
2013-09-17 10:35:31 AM  

untaken_name: give me doughnuts: netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.

And yet we have one of the lowest individual and corporate tax burdens in the developed world.
So maybe the problem isn't bloated government.

Because spending 1.30 times what you take in is not a problem? Leaving a debt so large it will consume your descendants isn't a problem? Geez, what do you consider to be a problem?


How about *what* the miserable assholes we send to represent us *do* with that money? You know, cheap things like starting wars, prosecuting pot smokers, handing out farm subsidies and bales of money to corporations who are already rich?

No, you're absolutely right! We are in the place we are because of greedy middle-class taxpayers! Those bastards in Iowa insist on p*ssing off middle-easterners so much that they keep trying to kill us, so we gotta go get 'em - amirite?

\go ahead, keep parroting those talking points
\\they must be telling you all the truth - none of those radio guys profit from stirring your ass up
 
2013-09-17 10:36:39 AM  

MithrandirBooga: lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth.  Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.


Let me explain to you what is currently happening in our world. This graph is a handy demonstration:

[dissidentvoice.org image 585x412]

You will note that as our manufacturing output increases, the number of manufacturing jobs falls. Human beings are being replaced by machines. This is just manufacturing; the service sector is now making inroads in automating their jobs too. The population of the planet is increasing exponentially as well.

So, let's go back to economics class. The law of supply and demand, specifically.

When supply of an object goes up, the price goes down.
When demand of an object goes down, the price goes down.

These rules are universal and irrefutable.

So what happens when we start to introduce machines to replace human labour? The demand for human labor drops, and so does wages. What happens when the population continues to grow exponentially? The supply of human labor goes up, causing wages to further collapse.

We're nearing the point in human history where the supply of labour will be so high and the demand for labour will be so low that the effective market price of that labour will be Zero.

What in the actual fark do you think is going to happen when that happens?


I'm not a socialist because I want to steal your money. Chances are, I make more than you. I'm a socialist because I have a brain and understand what is happening in the world today.


Despite this, unemployment has not seen a similar trend.

The doomsaying has been going on for more than a century. Heck - Marx thought automation was going to facilitate revolution. 150 years later, and we're still quite able to have a capitalist system and relatively high employment.

I am unimpressed.
 
2013-09-17 10:36:57 AM  

doubled99: Man I hate people who have achieved far more than me. Fark them, man.


I'm not upset that they're so successful, or even that they're using that success to push undue influence. It's that they use that influence to further cement themselves in their position at the expense of everyone else. With the exception of people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, it seems like today's super-rich have no sense of noblesse oblige.
 
2013-09-17 10:37:14 AM  

lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth.  Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.


When companies do not pay enough to live on without getting government assistance, then it is the corporations who are stealing from taxpayers, not the employees. You are a very reliable troll, and I have no doubt you already know this, asshole.
 
2013-09-17 10:37:32 AM  

MithrandirBooga: We're nearing the point in human history where the supply of labour will be so high and the demand for labour will be so low that the effective market price of that labour will be Zero.

What in the actual fark do you think is going to happen when that happens?


The rich people will finally release one of those doomsday flu strains?
 
2013-09-17 10:38:17 AM  
Take any given time in recorded history.  At least 80% of everything (and I do mean at least) has been owned by 20% (usually much less) of the population.

Even in communist economies there were/are those more equal than others.

That said a civilisation can be judged on how it treats it's poor, elderly, and ill.

After taking many strides forward on that front, we are now slipping slowly backwards.
 
2013-09-17 10:38:23 AM  

forcebender: For what it's worth, if you liquidated all that cash and redistributed to the entire US population (350M) that would be a payment of $142 a year for the next 40 years (in 2013 dollars.)  Or a single payment of $5714 ... to EVERY person in the US.


At which point we'd spend it and they'd get it all back.
 
2013-09-17 10:39:13 AM  

Ricardo Klement: Carn: Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.

That's a really bad idea. As wage indexation goes up, monetary policy is less and less capable of doing anything.

Let λ denote the proportion of wages indexed. If λ is positive,

Then πt-πt-1 =-(α/(1-λ))(ut-un)

As λ -> 1, and all contracts are indexed, ut=un at all times and monetary policy does nothing at all.

So the more contracts you index, the more inflation starts accelerating.


Yeah? Well fark you!

/I keed
 
Ant
2013-09-17 10:39:53 AM  

DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?


No, this is the thread where people act like there's nothing wrong with the fact that the wealthy 1% own the vast majority of everything.
 
2013-09-17 10:40:01 AM  
The only solution is the invention of replicators.

/and free bacon, got to have bacon
 
2013-09-17 10:41:22 AM  

Ricardo Klement: Carn: Joe Blowme: Carn: Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid

Which is not even remotely my argument as stated just below my post that you quoted, but you decided to cut it out.  Keep on trollin Joe.

If that is not what you are saying then why the hate for those who have more than you?

When did I say anything about hate?  I've said it a few times already, my stance is pragmatic.  Current conditions are historically bad both for the country at large and the individuals holding the vast quantities of wealth.  We should take steps that will narrow the gap in the future both in the form of reinstating higher taxes on the wealthy (rates that have been much higher than they are currently for close to 100 years) and in the form of pushing economic growth for the bottom and middle and the easiest, most obvious, and currently very necessary way to do that is to start a huge Infrastructure development program.

Part of the problem is that any system that allows merit to be rewarded and allows some proportion of wealth to be reinvested and some proportion passed-on to future generations is a system wherein wealth converges. Free Market systems will certainly have wealth convergence be a marked feature.


I agree and I am totally ok with this.  The problem is that currently there is too much convergence on too few people.  We need to tilt things back a little bit in the other direction.
 
Ant
2013-09-17 10:41:38 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!


This.

Get a job, peasant!
 
2013-09-17 10:42:14 AM  

Joe Blowme: dready zim: Joe Blowme: dready zim: Lady J: Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.

see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click

Also, DO put a hard limit on individual wealth gain. Peg it to the minimum wage to give them an incentive to increase that...

fark your american dream that lets a few people ruin the world for the rest of us.

Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works

Success built on the hard work of others deserves punishment. It would work better if we rewarded hard work, not your ability to screw over others.

How you get your success matters. A lot.

But it is ok to just take it from those whom you feel didnt "earn it" properly?  If they break the law aquiring it, im with you. If they did not, i can not.


Then all you have to do is purchase your own laws. Or the guys that make them. If you had some cash, that might be possible.

denver.mylittlefacewhen.com
 
Ant
2013-09-17 10:45:56 AM  

OnlyM3: Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).


Wow! It's almost as if something happened in late 2008 to fark over millions of people.
 
2013-09-17 10:47:37 AM  

CheapEngineer: Joe Blowme: dready zim: Joe Blowme: dready zim: Lady J: Carn: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

No, but reasonable actions can be taken to attempt to lower the gap in future earnings while at the same time adding funds to our still unbalanced budget.

Add a couple more higher tax brackets and raise income taxes on the wealthy.
Count capital gains as income over 100K and tax at same rate.
Get rid of the ceiling on earnings for paying social security.
Make sure estate taxes stay around or are reinstated.
Add a very small trading tax on the major US stock markets (.03%) to dampen high frequency trading and gambling for short term profit.  If you want to gamble trade commodities.
Reinstate Glass Steagal or a new version.  Don't let banks be in the mortgage business and trading business.
Raise the minimum wage and peg it to CPI, inflation, or some other sensible metric.
Create a new Federal works program with the goal to rebuild every single defunct federal road, bridge, dam, or other in America.  This will take decades.  If you grow the bottom and middle, the vast wealth at the top becomes less dangerous to the economy.

see, this is what I meant. you get a 'smart!' click

Also, DO put a hard limit on individual wealth gain. Peg it to the minimum wage to give them an incentive to increase that...

fark your american dream that lets a few people ruin the world for the rest of us.

Yes, by all means lets punnish success and see how that works

Success built on the hard work of others deserves punishment. It would work better if we rewarded hard work, not your ability to screw over others.

How you get your success matters. A lot.

But it is ok to just take it from those whom you feel didnt "earn it" properly?  If they break the law aquiring it, im with you. If they did not, i can not.

Then all you have to do is purchase your own laws. Or the guys that make them. If you had ...


So its the politicians who are at fault, vote for people who will do the right thing.... if you can find them. If not, sounds like you are running for office
 
2013-09-17 10:48:10 AM  

Ant: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yeah massive wealth inequality exists because people are lazy!

This.

Get a job, peasant!


and when you get a job, don't complain that it isn't enough to live on! Cancel your cell phone! Drive a 20 year old car! Take the bus! Don't you dare use food stamps.
 
2013-09-17 10:48:22 AM  

Ant: OnlyM3: Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Wow! It's almost as if something happened in late 2008 to fark over millions of people.


election of Obama?
 
2013-09-17 10:51:16 AM  

Joe Blowme: Ant: OnlyM3: Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Wow! It's almost as if something happened in late 2008 to fark over millions of people.

election of Obama Financial Crisis?

 
2013-09-17 10:52:19 AM  

Joe Blowme: The only solution is the invention of replicators.


get a load of this commie wanting to redistribute molecules, get a job hippy
 
2013-09-17 10:53:28 AM  

Madbassist1: Joe Blowme: Ant: OnlyM3: Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Wow! It's almost as if something happened in late 2008 to fark over millions of people.

election of Obama Financial Crisis?


The 2 combined created the perfect storm DUN DUN DUUUUUN1
crimsonaudio.net
 
2013-09-17 10:55:33 AM  

Headso: Joe Blowme: The only solution is the invention of replicators.

get a load of this commie wanting to redistribute molecules, get a job hippy


MOLECULAR JUSTICE!!!
 
2013-09-17 11:00:54 AM  

maddogdelta: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

It happens all the time. It's called "Illegal Forclosure" and banks have gotten richer, and nobody goes to jail for it. EVERYONE WINS!

Except for the poor people who lost their house, but who gives a flying fark about them anyway?


Poverty is a crime, citizen.
 
2013-09-17 11:06:49 AM  
Man I hate people who have achieved far more than me  have rigged the system so that only a select few EVER had a chance. Fark them, man.

FTFM



Maybe in the next life you'll be smarter and do this yourself.
 
2013-09-17 11:07:03 AM  

lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.


See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.

Your irrelevant prod at atheism at the end there tends to confirm the diagnosis.
 
2013-09-17 11:09:36 AM  
The harder you work the less your money is worth, the harder you get other people to work for you the more you profit.
 
2013-09-17 11:11:21 AM  

doubled99: Man I hate people who have achieved far more than me  have rigged the system so that only a select few EVER had a chance. Fark them, man.

FTFM


Maybe in the next life you'll be smarter and do this yourself.


Indeed, we need more people on board with tax law, a minimum wage, and social services that benefits the middle class and not the super wealthy.
 
2013-09-17 11:12:19 AM  

doubled99: Man I hate people who have achieved far more than me  have rigged the system so that only a select few EVER had a chance. Fark them, man.

FTFM


Maybe in the next life you'll be smarter and do this yourself.


Pehaps, if I happen to be born early enough to get in on the action............................
 
2013-09-17 11:13:51 AM  

netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.


You and I might have to work 107 days to pay our tax bill, but people who actually have money don't pay much in taxes.  Maybe the bloated government isn't the problem, maybe it's the top 1% avoiding their fair share of taxes.
 
2013-09-17 11:14:42 AM  
Cash Money!  Lawd!  This is a Cash Money thread!  Woo woo!
 
2013-09-17 11:16:54 AM  
revolutions don't start until the masses can't feed their families.  that's why the mega-rich and political parties make sure that the masses have just enough to live on.   dip below that, and it's game on.  they won't let that happen.
 
2013-09-17 11:21:29 AM  

stir22: revolutions don't start until the masses can't feed their families.  that's why the mega-rich and political parties make sure that the masses have just enough to live on.   dip below that, and it's game on.  they won't let that happen.


Who is "they? You do realize, almost all the liberal leaders pushing policy, are mega rich, right?
 
2013-09-17 11:22:05 AM  

Telos: netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.

You and I might have to work 107 days to pay our tax bill, but people who actually have money don't pay much in taxes.  Maybe the bloated government isn't the problem, maybe it's the top 1% avoiding their fair share of taxes.


Might want to actually look at some numbers to see how stupidly wrong you are.
 
2013-09-17 11:26:43 AM  

Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?


Well, we have Barry now.   Less work is turned into increased rewards.   Next up.. minimum wage of 25$.  Everyone should be able to afford a small house.  Enjoy your (5)Buck Double!
 
2013-09-17 11:28:30 AM  
There isn't a lot of left-wing sentiment in this thread that is untrue, per se. But it's self-defeating. The rich get richer, that's the way of the world. But by concentrating on hating the wealthy for their wealth doesn't put another dollar in your pocket. You can tax them to oblivion if it makes you feel better, but it won't fix anything. The government is like one of those shady charities that doesn't mention that 90% of their income goes to administrative costs. Your 50 dollar donation bought little Motumbo a toothbrush and a pack of bandaids.

Everyone always concentrates on taxes, but we need to concentrate on destroying the ways that the wealthy can use the government to screw us. Rich people without power can only get richer if they sell us something we want. Rich people WITH power can get richer by legislating that we buy from them. The way back to prosperity is to level the playing field. Heavily regulating the financial industry is a good way to start. There is no reason that a private company should be able to virtually enslave a person over a 10 grand credit card. I don't care if the consumer DID sign the contract. There is a reason you can't bet your internal organs in Vegas casinos either. Removing oppressive permitting for small business is another good way.

But even if we do level the playing field, all that buys is an opportunity.
 
2013-09-17 11:28:42 AM  

Strik3r: Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread

The wealthy are stealing money from the poor (yes in many cases it should be labelled as actual theft), shipping jobs overseas after maxing out the debt on the people in this country thereby limiting the ability to repay. I don't think think you can call that jealousy.

People are being finacially farked and hard. I think alot of it has to do with the debt collection agencies and their relationship to the companies they represent. It's more money for all if it goes thru DC.


Who forced these people to buy things on credit and not repay it?
 
2013-09-17 11:28:44 AM  

Thunderpipes: Telos: netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.

You and I might have to work 107 days to pay our tax bill, but people who actually have money don't pay much in taxes.  Maybe the bloated government isn't the problem, maybe it's the top 1% avoiding their fair share of taxes.

Might want to actually look at some numbers to see how stupidly wrong you are.


Yeah, based on 262 working days in a year you have to work 104.8 days to pay your income tax. 107 days is a stupid exaggeration.
 
2013-09-17 11:32:24 AM  

Magnanimous_J: You can tax them to oblivion if it makes you feel better, but it won't fix anything. The government is like one of those shady charities that doesn't mention that 90% of their income goes to administrative costs. Your 50 dollar donation bought little Motumbo a toothbrush and a pack of bandaids.


Even if that's true it still means the money finds it's way into the hands of a bunch of middle class government bureaucrats and is less concentrated.
 
2013-09-17 11:33:30 AM  
Good news everyone, the fed govt took in record high tax receipts last year including An extra $116 Billion from personal income tax. But the gov still over spent by $750billion, you can't trust them fools with nothing.

Anyone here notice that $750 billion in freedom we bought? Me neither...:(
 
2013-09-17 11:33:44 AM  

Infernalist: We let the GOP fark things up with foreign wars and obscene tax cuts and cronyism and all but open bribery in the government at the highest level..


And then we changed control of the House, Senate and White House to the Democrats and let them do it for a while.

Did the wars continue? Yep. Obama immediately tripled the size of the war in Afghanistan and tried to extend the war in Iraq past the treaty date for total withdrawal not to mention starting a war in Libya and trying to start another in Syria.

Were the Bush tax cuts for the rich allowed to expire as scheduled? Nope. They were made a permanent part of the tax code just a few months ago. (Fiscal Cliff!!!11!)

Has cronyism continued? Are you farking kidding me? Donate some money to Obama and you get to be an ambassador. Donate enough money and you get to pick your own Secretary of the Treasury.

Has Bribery continued? You didn't notice too many of the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy being prosecuted, did you?

/Both sides are owned by the same people
//So stop voting for them
 
2013-09-17 11:39:16 AM  

Infernalist: Because right now, it's stupid.  We let the GOP fark things up with foreign wars



marsoft: Thunderpipes: Telos: netcentric: Democrats are hoping angry taxpayers will blame the rich for having to send money to Washington

Class envy.

Despite record tax revenues, the federal government still racked up $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013

I think I know why there are issues for the middle class today.   And it isn't because of a few wealthy individuals.

You have to work 107 days in America,  just to pay your tax bill.

Maybe a large bloated Government is the problem.

You and I might have to work 107 days to pay our tax bill, but people who actually have money don't pay much in taxes.  Maybe the bloated government isn't the problem, maybe it's the top 1% avoiding their fair share of taxes.

Might want to actually look at some numbers to see how stupidly wrong you are.

Yeah, based on 262 working days in a year you have to work 104.8 days to pay your income tax. 107 days is a stupid exaggeration.


Well Damn!

If you only work two days a week, then you dont pay your income tax until Christmas!   Bastards!
 
2013-09-17 11:42:41 AM  

marsoft: Yeah, based on 262 working days in a year you have to work 104.8 days to pay your income tax. 107 days is a stupid exaggeration.


I'm pretty sure the exaggeration is how much tax you will get of of a 100% tax of the 1%.
If only we taxed some other evil guy more, than 300 million of us can pay our fair share.
 
2013-09-17 11:44:07 AM  

Thunderpipes: stir22: revolutions don't start until the masses can't feed their families.  that's why the mega-rich and political parties make sure that the masses have just enough to live on.   dip below that, and it's game on.  they won't let that happen.

Who is "they? You do realize, almost all the liberal leaders pushing policy, are mega rich, right?


i do.  i refer to "they" as the uber-rich, policy makers, and fortune 500 ceo's....  i've started to think that they are all trolling us.  especially the pubs and dems.   that's it's all a charade, a facade.....they get together at the highest levels and decide who gets to be in power for awhile...and, that it doesn't really matter.

for the record, i do very well.   six figure income, steady job with benefits....etc.     i'm okay.   but the middle class, as we know it, is gone....and i feel for the millions who just want to do "a little better."   also,   i feel that the gap that is widening between the uber-rich and uber-poor is by design, and that it doesn't matter who is in power in Washington.

/just my opinion, ymmv
 
2013-09-17 11:46:23 AM  

BullBearMS: /Both sides are owned by the same people
//So stop voting for them


assets.sbnation.com
 
2013-09-17 11:49:51 AM  

baufan2005: My company took away our bonuses, longevity checks, hell even our Christmas hams. They then cut all employees pay by 10%. The three main bosses just had a huge private parking deck built for only them. Then we constantly hear the line "Just be happy you have a job" I am not really complaining as much as I just wanted to show that Mr. Scrooge is indeed real.


It's not only the private sector. I'm a Federal employee.

My bosses (Congress) haven't given me a raise in 4 years, they've canceled all bonuses, curtailed travel and equipment acquisition, and regularly place freezes on hiring so we can't get the people we need. At the same time, they work (when they work), in plush, even luxurious offices, have huge staffs, make tons of money in various ways, authorize themselves any travel or equipment they think they need, etc., etc. etc.

Mr Scrooge gerrymandered his district to keep himself in office.
 
2013-09-17 11:50:05 AM  
"So how does this trickle down work?"

"We grab every speck of available wealth, currency and useful economic leverage and shove it up our asses, use that to leverage MORE pelf, never return it to circulation, and if you pester us for bread, this officer we bought and paid for will shoot you."

"Where does the trickle down come in?"

"You know that silent tear that forms on a child's cheek when they haven't had enough to eat?"
 
2013-09-17 11:50:31 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: marsoft: Yeah, based on 262 working days in a year you have to work 104.8 days to pay your income tax. 107 days is a stupid exaggeration.

I'm pretty sure the exaggeration is how much tax you will get of of a 100% tax of the 1%.
If only we taxed some other evil guy more, than 300 million of us can pay our fair share.


Someone left their sarcasm detector at home.
 
2013-09-17 11:51:25 AM  

PunGent: lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.

Your irrelevant prod at atheism at the end there tends to confirm the diagnosis.



Tell you what.  You go start up a company that pays people, not the going rate for their quality of work, but based on
what people would like to be paid in fantasyland.

Let us know when you can go public.
 
2013-09-17 11:51:58 AM  

bunner: BullBearMS: /Both sides are owned by the same people
//So stop voting for them

[assets.sbnation.com image 300x300]


This is all well and good in theory but in practice you "throw your vote away" and republicans get in and do a smash and grab on the government for the entirety of their term. There's a reason on of their main policy positions is disenfranchisement.
 
2013-09-17 11:55:28 AM  
PunGent:

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.


 People are paid exactly what they are worth.  If they don't like it, they can go work for a competitor who will easily see they are such a great value.
 
2013-09-17 11:56:29 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: Strik3r: Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread

The wealthy are stealing money from the poor (yes in many cases it should be labelled as actual theft), shipping jobs overseas after maxing out the debt on the people in this country thereby limiting the ability to repay. I don't think think you can call that jealousy.

People are being finacially farked and hard. I think alot of it has to do with the debt collection agencies and their relationship to the companies they represent. It's more money for all if it goes thru DC.

Who forced these people to buy things on credit and not repay it?


Hey look everybody!!   Nutsack_Jim has never had to borrow money and experience corporate wide cut backs at THE SAME TIME !!!

You really ARE special. You must be able to send you kids to school and pay for it all!!! I'm sure you bought you house and car WITH CASH.
 
2013-09-17 11:56:44 AM  

Headso: Carousel Beast: doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?

99.6% of "poor" people own a refrigerator, so it's working pretty good.


so, correct me if i'm wrong...you define poverty by appliance acquisition?
 
2013-09-17 11:57:09 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: PunGent:

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.

 People are paid exactly what they are worth.  If they don't like it, they can go work for a competitor who will easily see they are such a great value.


Slightly wrong.  People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept.  Worth is not an absolute.
 
2013-09-17 11:59:16 AM  

stir22: Thunderpipes: stir22: revolutions don't start until the masses can't feed their families.  that's why the mega-rich and political parties make sure that the masses have just enough to live on.   dip below that, and it's game on.  they won't let that happen.

Who is "they? You do realize, almost all the liberal leaders pushing policy, are mega rich, right?

i do.  i refer to "they" as the uber-rich, policy makers, and fortune 500 ceo's....  i've started to think that they are all trolling us.  especially the pubs and dems.   that's it's all a charade, a facade.....they get together at the highest levels and decide who gets to be in power for awhile...and, that it doesn't really matter.

for the record, i do very well.   six figure income, steady job with benefits....etc.     i'm okay.   but the middle class, as we know it, is gone....and i feel for the millions who just want to do "a little better."   also,   i feel that the gap that is widening between the uber-rich and uber-poor is by design, and that it doesn't matter who is in power in Washington.

/just my opinion, ymmv


I feel your pain. I am much in the same boat as you. I started out lower middle class, and have done very well. I have a six figure income as well (and I don't mean a smidgen over 100k, either) and things that go with it. I, for the first time in my life, don't have to check my bank account before I spend money. I can have my bills paid automatically, I can eat out as much as I want, and drive a nice car.

People I grew up with almost universally are scraping by. People I am very close to are living in abject poverty, one or two weeks from being on the street. I've had life long friends ask me for money to buy food. Much more prevalent than that are people who cant afford to go to the doctor.

Jobs that used to pay a living wage just dont anymore. I know and love people who make 8.50 an hour and are supposed to make ends meet on that. Food, shelter, gas insurance, etc. Couple that with the courts propensity to suspend someones license for not paying certain bills, and we've created an entire underclass of people as well as an overclass. With a very very few like you and me in the middle.

Jobs used to pay enough to support people, now they dont, and "Job Creators" realize that the government will happily subsidize their slave wages with welfare and medicaid. What do Job Creators do? They do what they do. Pay the lowest wages they possibly can while maximizing profits for sharholders. Hell it would be illegal if they didn't.

This should not be permitted to occur.
 
2013-09-17 11:59:33 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: Who forced these people to buy things on credit and not repay it?


The broken nature of our economic system.

Say you need a house. For most people, the breakdown is like so : Either waste hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years paying rent, which is bad, or take the very intelligent risk of taking a loan to purchase property, which is sadly, incredibly overpriced in our market precisely because investment capitalism paired with sort sighted greed via real estate speculation has driven housing prices very, very high. So the system has created artificial value, where the desire to flip property for profit overshadows the more common goal of simply needing a place to live. However, despite this, it's still a far more sensible plan than just dumping money into a rent hole, so people take the frankly intelligent risk. 

However, the boom and bust cycle of an economy, any economy is going to mean that some people, during down swings, are going to end up unemployed as businesses, seeing less business and profit, downsize. This is inevitable, and it's not someone's "fault." During these typically temporary periods of unemployment, people may default or fall behind on payments for these loans. We have, in the US, a host of rules and incentives to keep the lenders from overreacting and foreclosing on these people during these, as stated, typically temporary periods of misfortune. Unfortunately, again, short term, anti-social greed has generated a condition where many lenders are refusing to consider this, and they are happily trashing lives, the economy and whole neighborhoods simply to be self serving and greedy. Sometimes they do this legally, more and more lately not even that, but in neither case is it appropriate, being neither ethical nor practically desirable in the long run for our economy or society.

The system is broken and many towards the top of the economy wealth scale are abusing it horribly. It's inappropriate and, frankly, shiatty to keep trying to blame people abused and exploited by bad people employing a broken system to exploit need. If you can't envision and promote a better system than that then get out of social philosophy and politics and for god's sake, please don't vote.
 
2013-09-17 11:59:33 AM  

Magnanimous_J: The rich get richer, that's the way of the world. But by concentrating on hating the wealthy for their wealth doesn't put another dollar in your pocket. You can tax them to oblivion if it makes you feel better, but it won't fix anything.


400 families get $2 trillion. Taxing that $2 trillion "into oblivion" would, in fact, fix a whole lot of shiat, and fast!  But no one is arguing that "oblivion" strawman point in the first place, so who farking cares?

Asking the richest of the rich to pay their fair share* in taxes is not an onerous demand. It is reasonable and fair. And it would be a decent step in the right direction.

*A legit topic of debate is the definition of 'fair share' in this context... but I wanted to clean up the broader conceptual misunderstanding first.
 
2013-09-17 12:00:18 PM  

marsoft: People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept


And it better be a damn sight lower than your poor ass thinks it should be, cause there's a 1,000 serfs waiting in line to do it for less.
 
2013-09-17 12:01:28 PM  
Instead of attacking trees maybe we should step back and get above the timber line where the whole forest is lain out before us below.

When you allow some to counterfeit the money supply, they add nothing to our pile of stuff, or in this case the forest. What it does do is allow them to shift the property line so more of the stuff is on their side of the line.
 
2013-09-17 12:02:11 PM  

bunner: marsoft: People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept

And it better be a damn sight lower than your poor ass thinks it should be, cause there's a 1,000 serfs waiting in line to do it for less.


I already said basically that in the second part of my sentence.  So what was the point of your posting?
 
2013-09-17 12:02:48 PM  

VendorXeno: However, the boom and bust cycle of an economy, any economy is going to mean that some people, during down swings, are going to end up unemployed as businesses, seeing less business and profit, downsize.


So, debt harvesting.  Let some sucker carry the 10 ton weight for the first 99 yards and when they are forced to put it down, you pick it up for pennies and prance over the goal line.
 
2013-09-17 12:03:03 PM  

Madbassist1: stir22: Thunderpipes: stir22: revolutions don't start until the masses can't feed their families.  that's why the mega-rich and political parties make sure that the masses have just enough to live on.   dip below that, and it's game on.  they won't let that happen.

Who is "they? You do realize, almost all the liberal leaders pushing policy, are mega rich, right?

i do.  i refer to "they" as the uber-rich, policy makers, and fortune 500 ceo's....  i've started to think that they are all trolling us.  especially the pubs and dems.   that's it's all a charade, a facade.....they get together at the highest levels and decide who gets to be in power for awhile...and, that it doesn't really matter.

for the record, i do very well.   six figure income, steady job with benefits....etc.     i'm okay.   but the middle class, as we know it, is gone....and i feel for the millions who just want to do "a little better."   also,   i feel that the gap that is widening between the uber-rich and uber-poor is by design, and that it doesn't matter who is in power in Washington.

/just my opinion, ymmv

I feel your pain. I am much in the same boat as you. I started out lower middle class, and have done very well. I have a six figure income as well (and I don't mean a smidgen over 100k, either) and things that go with it. I, for the first time in my life, don't have to check my bank account before I spend money. I can have my bills paid automatically, I can eat out as much as I want, and drive a nice car.

People I grew up with almost universally are scraping by. People I am very close to are living in abject poverty, one or two weeks from being on the street. I've had life long friends ask me for money to buy food. Much more prevalent than that are people who cant afford to go to the doctor.

Jobs that used to pay a living wage just dont anymore. I know and love people who make 8.50 an hour and are supposed to make ends meet on that. Food, shelter, gas insurance, etc. Couple that with t ...


EXACTLY.  you are much more eloquent than am i.   well-said.
 
2013-09-17 12:03:10 PM  

stir22: Headso: Carousel Beast: doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?

99.6% of "poor" people own a refrigerator, so it's working pretty good.

so, correct me if i'm wrong...you define poverty by appliance acquisition?



I think he's being facetious, but that is an interesting point. How should we define wealth? I'm definitely middle class. Last night I bought a pretty decent steak from the grocery store for about 5 bucks. That equates to about 10 minutes of work (before taxes). My electricity costs about I hour of work per month. My student loan payment is about 3 hours of work per month. Given that these middle class essentials are NOT a financial burden, how is taxing the rich more going to help me out?
 
2013-09-17 12:03:28 PM  

stir22: Headso: Carousel Beast: doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?

99.6% of "poor" people own a refrigerator, so it's working pretty good.

so, correct me if i'm wrong...you define poverty by appliance acquisition?


it's a graphic from fox news, it's popular for the right wing to claim both that the war on poverty doesn't work while at the same time saying the poor in America are doing better than ever.
 
2013-09-17 12:03:44 PM  

marsoft: bunner: marsoft: People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept

And it better be a damn sight lower than your poor ass thinks it should be, cause there's a 1,000 serfs waiting in line to do it for less.

I already said basically that in the second part of my sentence.  So what was the point of your posting?


Are you trying to tell me I interrupted you?  Jees, gov, I had no idea this was a lecture.  *snort*
 
2013-09-17 12:03:46 PM  

Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.


Actually, no they aren't, the poor guy is poor because not every job is valued at $30/hour and if you never learn the skills to hit that mark that's on you.
 
2013-09-17 12:04:18 PM  

Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?


Is this the thread where liberals blame republicans even though the wealth gain is a direct effect of quantative easing, a policy put in place under Obama?
 
2013-09-17 12:04:55 PM  

DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?


Yes, because it's just that easy to work yourself into the top 1%.

The other 99% are just lazy.
 
2013-09-17 12:04:55 PM  

Strik3r: Nutsac_Jim: Strik3r: Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread

The wealthy are stealing money from the poor (yes in many cases it should be labelled as actual theft), shipping jobs overseas after maxing out the debt on the people in this country thereby limiting the ability to repay. I don't think think you can call that jealousy.

People are being finacially farked and hard. I think alot of it has to do with the debt collection agencies and their relationship to the companies they represent. It's more money for all if it goes thru DC.

Who forced these people to buy things on credit and not repay it?

Hey look everybody!!   Nutsack_Jim has never had to borrow money and experience corporate wide cut backs at THE SAME TIME !!!

You really ARE special. You must be able to send you kids to school and pay for it all!!! I'm sure you bought you house and car WITH CASH.


Yes, I did.   Funny things happen when you save money.   It grows into a bigger pile.

Yes, I had cut backs.  Since I wasn't a douchebag with a leased car and furniture from Rent-A-Center, there was no problem paying bills until I just found another job after those cut backs.

Most of people's problems are their own damn fault.  Some are just better at crying than others.
 
2013-09-17 12:05:01 PM  

Magnanimous_J: There is no reason that a private company should be able to virtually enslave a person over a 10 grand credit card. I don't care if the consumer DID sign the contract.


I presume this means you are also in favor of heavy regulation of private citizens.  You can't remove contractual obligation without stripping out consumer protection also.  Trying to pad personal responsibility because there are stupid people out there ends up shooting a lot of foots.
 
2013-09-17 12:05:19 PM  

bunner: marsoft: bunner: marsoft: People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept

And it better be a damn sight lower than your poor ass thinks it should be, cause there's a 1,000 serfs waiting in line to do it for less.

I already said basically that in the second part of my sentence.  So what was the point of your posting?

Are you trying to tell me I interrupted you?  Jees, gov, I had no idea this was a lecture.  *snort*


No I am saying your posting was redundant and added nothing to what I said.
 
2013-09-17 12:05:21 PM  

bunner: marsoft: People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept

And it better be a damn sight lower than your poor ass thinks it should be, cause there's a 1,000 serfs waiting in line to do it for less.


The economy is global now.  If you want to manufacture something you'd better be willing to make it cheaper than the guy in china can make it and ship it here.  You are in direct competition with millions, not thousands.
 
2013-09-17 12:07:43 PM  

lostcat: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Yes, because it's just that easy to work yourself into the top 1%.

The other 99% are just lazy.


Hey libtard, if everyone worked hard and had good jobs then nobody would be poor, it's so simple!
 
2013-09-17 12:07:43 PM  

marsoft: No I am saying your posting was redundant and added nothing to what I said.


And I'm trying to tell you that your pose of authority driven assessment is meaningless to me.  Wanna sammich?

www.pbs.org
 
2013-09-17 12:07:50 PM  

sufferpuppet: bunner: marsoft: People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept

And it better be a damn sight lower than your poor ass thinks it should be, cause there's a 1,000 serfs waiting in line to do it for less.

The economy is global now.  If you want to manufacture something you'd better be willing to make it cheaper than the guy in china can make it and ship it here.  You are in direct competition with millions, not thousands.


Why does everyone go back to manufacturing in these arguments?  Manufacturing jobs have and will continue to decline as production increases.  Manufacturing as the basic job was a 20th century blip.
 
2013-09-17 12:08:01 PM  

Magnanimous_J: stir22: Headso: Carousel Beast: doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?

99.6% of "poor" people own a refrigerator, so it's working pretty good.

so, correct me if i'm wrong...you define poverty by appliance acquisition?


I think he's being facetious, but that is an interesting point. How should we define wealth? I'm definitely middle class. Last night I bought a pretty decent steak from the grocery store for about 5 bucks. That equates to about 10 minutes of work (before taxes). My electricity costs about I hour of work per month. My student loan payment is about 3 hours of work per month. Given that these middle class essentials are NOT a financial burden, how is taxing the rich more going to help me out?


not sure it is.    and, i don't know how we should define wealth.  but, the definition of poverty is pretty clear.


Headso: stir22: Headso: Carousel Beast: doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?

99.6% of "poor" people own a refrigerator, so it's working pretty good.

so, correct me if i'm wrong...you define poverty by appliance acquisition?

it's a graphic from fox news, it's popular for the right wing to claim both that the war on poverty doesn't work while at the same time saying the poor in America are doing better than ever.


thanks.  for the record, i'm exactly the kind of person fox news caters to.   middle class, white, doing okay, etc.....and, i hate those farkers.
 
2013-09-17 12:08:58 PM  

bunner: marsoft: No I am saying your posting was redundant and added nothing to what I said.

And I'm trying to tell you that your pose of authority driven assessment is meaningless to me.  Wanna sammich?

[www.pbs.org image 602x452]


Is there mayo on that?
 
2013-09-17 12:09:33 PM  

marsoft: Nutsac_Jim: PunGent:

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.

 People are paid exactly what they are worth.  If they don't like it, they can go work for a competitor who will easily see they are such a great value.

Slightly wrong.  People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept.  Worth is not an absolute.


What the hell does that mean.

If you take your comic book in to sell it, it is worth what someone will give you for it.  Its not worth some other value one wants.
If 100 other sellers are willing to accept 50$ for the same book, the book is worth 50$.

If everyone gets together and decides they wont sell it for less than 75, the book is worth 75.  It is absolutely worth 75.
 
2013-09-17 12:10:16 PM  

untaken_name: Say, that *is* good news....for Obama.

/someone had to


But..but hes gonna fix everything, right?

Voters are morons.
 
2013-09-17 12:11:14 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: marsoft: Nutsac_Jim: PunGent:

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.

 People are paid exactly what they are worth.  If they don't like it, they can go work for a competitor who will easily see they are such a great value.

Slightly wrong.  People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept.  Worth is not an absolute.

What the hell does that mean.

If you take your comic book in to sell it, it is worth what someone will give you for it.  Its not worth some other value one wants.
If 100 other sellers are willing to accept 50$ for the same book, the book is worth 50$.

If everyone gets together and decides they wont sell it for less than 75, the book is worth 75.  It is absolutely worth 75.


Not if nobody will buy at 75.  Supply and demand.  It required agreement from both sides.
 
2013-09-17 12:11:24 PM  

marsoft: Manufacturing as the basic job was a 20th century blip.


Sort of.  When you create wealth, you take something of a lower index value, resources, and create something of a higher index value, a product.  Moving paper and binary data around doesn't really create wealth.  It just plays three card monte with it.  When you make something that is greater than the sum of it's parts, you create wealth.  This is why wealthy people use bad debt in the form of bank notes to leverage wealth instead of putting putting them between bread.
 
2013-09-17 12:12:07 PM  

marsoft: bunner: marsoft: No I am saying your posting was redundant and added nothing to what I said.

And I'm trying to tell you that your pose of authority driven assessment is meaningless to me.  Wanna sammich?

[www.pbs.org image 602x452]

Is there mayo on that?


Sorry, you'll have to bootstrap your own mayo.
 
2013-09-17 12:13:40 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Strik3r: Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread

The wealthy are stealing money from the poor (yes in many cases it should be labelled as actual theft), shipping jobs overseas after maxing out the debt on the people in this country thereby limiting the ability to repay. I don't think think you can call that jealousy.

People are being finacially farked and hard. I think alot of it has to do with the debt collection agencies and their relationship to the companies they represent. It's more money for all if it goes thru DC.

Who forced these people to buy things on credit and not repay it?


Republicans, have you not been paying attention?
 
2013-09-17 12:14:05 PM  

lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth.  Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.


Actually, the main feature of capitalism is that workers aren't paid the full value of their labor. The people at the top live off of the surplus value created when workers are not paid the full market value of the end good/service they produce. Exploitation is a feature of capitalism, not a bug.
 
2013-09-17 12:14:55 PM  

bunner: marsoft: Manufacturing as the basic job was a 20th century blip.

Sort of.  When you create wealth, you take something of a lower index value, resources, and create something of a higher index value, a product.  Moving paper and binary data around doesn't really create wealth.  It just plays three card monte with it.  When you make something that is greater than the sum of it's parts, you create wealth.  This is why wealthy people use bad debt in the form of bank notes to leverage wealth instead of putting putting them between bread.


Yes, but not all processes that create something are manufacturing.  Art is not manufacturing, Cinema is not manufacturing, porn is not manufacturing.  Software engineering is not manufacturing.  Yet all are examples of industries that create a product.
 
2013-09-17 12:15:53 PM  

Headso: bunner: BullBearMS: /Both sides are owned by the same people
//So stop voting for them

[assets.sbnation.com image 300x300]

This is all well and good in theory but in practice you "throw your vote away" and republicans get in and do a smash and grab on the government for the entirety of their term. There's a reason on of their main policy positions is disenfranchisement.


Which is another way of saying that you don't mind if the richest Americans buy off both parties and are allowed to pay a lower percentage in taxes than the working poor.

You just care about which of the two parties who enable it are nominally in charge.

Frankly, you just ensure that we never fix the problem.
 
2013-09-17 12:16:51 PM  

VendorXeno: Say you need a house. For most people, the breakdown is like so : Either waste hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years paying rent, which is bad, or take the very intelligent risk of taking a loan to purchase property, which is sadly, incredibly overpriced in our market precisely because investment capitalism paired with sort sighted greed via real estate speculation has driven housing prices very, very high. So the system has created artificial value, where the desire to flip property for profit overshadows the more common goal of simply needing a place to live. However, despite this, it's still a far more sensible plan than just dumping money into a rent hole, so people take the frankly intelligent risk. 

However, the boom and bust cycle of an economy, any economy is going to mean that some people, during down swings, are going to end up unemployed as businesses, seeing less business and profit, downsize. This is inevitable, and it's not someone's "fault." During these typically temporary periods of unemployment, people may default or fall behind on payments for these loans.


So.. what you are saying is that it might actually make more sense to rent.  That way, when the company lays everyone off, you are not stuck with a huge albatross of a mortgage payment.  You can also move to where the jobs are now located, instead of being anchored down with your new property.  Oh, and when the AC breaks, you just call the landlord, instead of getting a home depot credit card to put the new 8500 AC unit on it.   (assuming the AC breaks right after you get shiattcanned, so HomeDepot doesnt know yet)

'Rent is throwing money away' is the cause of many peoples problems.
 
2013-09-17 12:17:25 PM  
Damn you, George W. Bush!

oh wait.
 
2013-09-17 12:20:44 PM  
[crawls into bunner's lap, shivering]
 
2013-09-17 12:21:03 PM  

Mr_Fabulous: Magnanimous_J: The rich get richer, that's the way of the world. But by concentrating on hating the wealthy for their wealth doesn't put another dollar in your pocket. You can tax them to oblivion if it makes you feel better, but it won't fix anything.

400 families get $2 trillion. Taxing that $2 trillion "into oblivion" would, in fact, fix a whole lot of shiat, and fast!  But no one is arguing that "oblivion" strawman point in the first place, so who farking cares?


What are you going to do for money in year two of your glorious tax plan?
 
2013-09-17 12:21:07 PM  
Let's see who makes stuff.   China.

Let's see who doesn't.  Us.

Let's see who's economy is growing and who's economy is imploding.   Ha ha.

When a very small collection of people legislates the endless support of the crappy IOUs they print, in the form of their sweat equity from the people who need them to survive, you can farm out the process of creating wealth to some flat on it's ass banana farm, get the products for pennies, sell them to the people who are carrying your debt for you for 3000% profit and all you have to do is make sure that they have to kiss your ass rosy to get their hands on enough of the Monopoly money your political shills have helped you stuff up your ass in order to keep buying it.  We're a nation of honey boo boo serfs chasing a printout of a carrot on a platinum stick.  Money is debt and debt is a shackle and we're carrying all the debt for every billionaire in the country.  They have no debt.  They have gov assured debt notes from a gov that c can assure nothing because that gov is bankrupt.  We're holding markers for the people who never pay them off.
 
2013-09-17 12:22:10 PM  

marsoft: Yes, but not all processes that create something are manufacturing.  Art is not manufacturing, Cinema is not manufacturing, porn is not manufacturing.  Software engineering is not manufacturing.


If you can pick up the result of the process and hold it in your hands, yeah, it is.
 
2013-09-17 12:23:13 PM  

Kittypie070: [crawls into bunner's lap, shivering]


*Blankets the kitty*  Sit by the heater.  That's what the heater is for.
 
2013-09-17 12:24:21 PM  

stir22: Jobs that used to pay a living wage just dont anymore. I know and love people who make 8.50 an hour and are supposed to make ends meet on that. Food, shelter, gas insurance, etc. Couple that with t ...

EXACTLY.  you are much more eloquent than am i.   well-said.



If they chose to not stay in school and learn some knowledge, and also chose to not learn a marketable trade, then they deserve 8.50 an hour.

If you go out whoring at night and never use protection, then you deserve to get herpes.  That is the logical result of your action.
 
Ant
2013-09-17 12:25:57 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: People are paid exactly what they are worth


Bullshiat. If the vast majority of people are willing to work for a wage that barely allows them to sustain life, guess what? You're screwed. It's a race to the bottom.
 
2013-09-17 12:26:20 PM  

bunner: marsoft: Yes, but not all processes that create something are manufacturing.  Art is not manufacturing, Cinema is not manufacturing, porn is not manufacturing.  Software engineering is not manufacturing.

If you can pick up the result of the process and hold it in your hands, yeah, it is.


OK, to clarify, in the analysis that governments and other organisations undertake, they do not consider these industries to be manufacturing.  Thus, if I was to agree with you, and I will for the sake of this.  Estimates of actual manufacturing in the west are simply wrong, that goes for people employed in manufacturing as well as manufacturing output.

Also, even ignoring this, manufacturing output has continued an upward trend in the west, while employment in what I will call "traditional" manufacturing has declined.  This trend really started in the 1980s, and is due more to automation than offshoring of jobs.
 
2013-09-17 12:26:34 PM  
Money is one more thing we created to serve human beings.  Every time we do that, some pack of dolts get whatever that thing is we created to serve human beings, sort of the point of any species, and scrape it into a big pile and say "Now you have to serve us, and therefore, serve that which was created to serve everybody, or you're f*cked".  Lazy, cheap, cowardly, nasty little pricks - the avaricious.
 
Ant
2013-09-17 12:27:35 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: If everyone gets together and decides they wont sell it for less than 75, the book is worth 75.  It is absolutely worth 75.


OMG! Socialism! You're talking about collective bargaining!
 
2013-09-17 12:28:39 PM  
I was always happy to do my job well and pursue my many other interests that didn't include trying to hoover up money at all times.  I couldn't care less about vast sums of wealth, because I don't need extra houses, jet skis, Ferraris, mistresses, arsenals, face-lifts, ball-washers, what-have-you.  But now it's like in
Alice in Wonderland where she had to run faster and faster just to stand still.  Have it, biatches.  I'll just try to hang on until the welcome release of death.
Always wonder what they see in too much green paper.
 
2013-09-17 12:29:07 PM  

Ant: Nutsac_Jim: If everyone gets together and decides they wont sell it for less than 75, the book is worth 75.  It is absolutely worth 75.

OMG! Socialism! You're talking about collective bargaining!


Or price fixing if it is done by a business.
 
2013-09-17 12:29:45 PM  

marsoft: OK, to clarify, in the analysis that governments and other organisations undertake, they do not consider these industries to be manufacturing.


Let me be up front.  I am of the opinion that all of the gymnastic nomenclature, pedantry an authoritarian "those who run things have asserted" malarkey is a con of epic proportions, a wank in a well appointed manse and is largely in place to keep people from keeping track of which walnut shell the pea is under.  Udder, overwrought, harrumphing from a pack of spunk trumpets with a single agenda of rigging the game.
 
2013-09-17 12:29:48 PM  

Ant: Nutsac_Jim: People are paid exactly what they are worth

Bullshiat. If the vast majority of people are willing to work for a wage that barely allows them to sustain life, guess what? You're screwed. It's a race to the bottom.


Then that is what they are worth.

They can either
a> eat less
b> get a roommate
c> team up with all the other workers and refuse to work for less money.

each of those will help with the bottom line at the end of the month.  better yet, do more than one.   Dont buy spinners.
 
2013-09-17 12:29:57 PM  

marsoft: sufferpuppet: bunner: marsoft: People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept

And it better be a damn sight lower than your poor ass thinks it should be, cause there's a 1,000 serfs waiting in line to do it for less.

The economy is global now.  If you want to manufacture something you'd better be willing to make it cheaper than the guy in china can make it and ship it here.  You are in direct competition with millions, not thousands.

Why does everyone go back to manufacturing in these arguments?  Manufacturing jobs have and will continue to decline as production increases.  Manufacturing as the basic job was a 20th century blip.


True, but that seems to be the golden standard everyone wants the country to go back to.  Bob worked in factory X and everything was wonderful.  It was just like leave it to beaver.  Life should have stayed that way forever.  It's the republican/democrat/union/rich/chinese/lazy fault that american ideal was ruinified.  

Times change, everyone will need to adapt.
 
2013-09-17 12:32:06 PM  

sufferpuppet: It's the republican/democrat/union/rich/chinese/lazy fault that american ideal was ruinified.


Oh, it's way worse than that.  America never existed.  America was a business plan.  And it worked.  And they're busting the joint out and moving the store.
 
2013-09-17 12:33:28 PM  
Possible solutions.

1.  Public financing of campaigns.  (Right now, it's pretty much only rich people who can run for office)
2.  Increased unionization.
3.  Tax capital gains like any other income (I'm willing to compromise at 35-45k of capital gains income not taxed at all, because that might promote social mobility)
4.  Single payer health care.
5.  Much tighter regulation of corporate board structures and compensation schemes.
6.  Actually enforce anti-trust law.
 
2013-09-17 12:33:40 PM  

bunner: Udder, utter overwrought, harrumphing from a pack of spunk trumpets with a single agenda of rigging the game.


FIFM.  No cows were pestered in the making of this post.
 
2013-09-17 12:34:08 PM  

bunner: marsoft: OK, to clarify, in the analysis that governments and other organisations undertake, they do not consider these industries to be manufacturing.

Let me be up front.  I am of the opinion that all of the gymnastic nomenclature, pedantry an authoritarian "those who run things have asserted" malarkey is a con of epic proportions, a wank in a well appointed manse and is largely in place to keep people from keeping track of which walnut shell the pea is under.  Udder, overwrought, harrumphing from a pack of spunk trumpets with a single agenda of rigging the game.


So to translate your long winded assertion.  You disagree with me.
 
2013-09-17 12:34:21 PM  

Magnanimous_J: I think he's being facetious, but that is an interesting point. How should we define wealth? I'm definitely middle class. Last night I bought a pretty decent steak from the grocery store for about 5 bucks. That equates to about 10 minutes of work (before taxes). My electricity costs about I hour of work per month. My student loan payment is about 3 hours of work per month. Given that these middle class essentials are NOT a financial burden, how is taxing the rich more going to help me out?


My electricity bill was 350-400 bucks last month. If you make that in an hour, you are no longer middle class, bub.
 
2013-09-17 12:34:26 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: stir22: Jobs that used to pay a living wage just dont anymore. I know and love people who make 8.50 an hour and are supposed to make ends meet on that. Food, shelter, gas insurance, etc. Couple that with t ...

EXACTLY.  you are much more eloquent than am i.   well-said.


If they chose to not stay in school and learn some knowledge, and also chose to not learn a marketable trade, then they deserve 8.50 an hour.

If you go out whoring at night and never use protection, then you deserve to get herpes.  That is the logical result of your action.


ummmm.......i know a WHOLE LOT of college grads delivering pizzas and doing other such jobs.......and no, not just ones with liberal arts degrees.
 
2013-09-17 12:34:47 PM  
Hard work might not always lead to success, but inaction (and whining) will always lead to failure.

/amidoinitrite?
 
2013-09-17 12:34:54 PM  

Cowboy Spencer: 1.  Public financing of campaigns.  (Right now, it's pretty much only rich people who can run for office)


Ever wonder why somebody would beg, borrow, mooch and cadge tens of millions of dollars to land a 400,000.00 a year temp civil service job?
 
2013-09-17 12:35:19 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: stir22: Jobs that used to pay a living wage just dont anymore. I know and love people who make 8.50 an hour and are supposed to make ends meet on that. Food, shelter, gas insurance, etc. Couple that with t ...

EXACTLY.  you are much more eloquent than am i.   well-said.


If they chose to not stay in school and learn some knowledge, and also chose to not learn a marketable trade, then they deserve 8.50 an hour.

If you go out whoring at night and never use protection, then you deserve to get herpes.  That is the logical result of your action.


Yeah! Just be like me. Went to college, graduated circa 2008, and there were few jobs. So on to grad school. Now about to finish with a PhD and now what? Onward to postdoc, paying not-a-whole-freakin-lot. If I'm lucky, I'll be able to START a real career paying more than 40k by the time I'm 35-40.

And no, not a degree in "underwater basketweaving". In a real hard science. Actually, it's a mix of 3 of the 4 initials in STEM. Which is awesome, since STEM jobs will be in demand forever.
Right?
RIGHT????
 
2013-09-17 12:35:57 PM  

bunner: Let's see who makes stuff.   China.

Let's see who doesn't.  Us.

Let's see who's economy is growing and who's economy is imploding.   Ha ha.

When a very small collection of people legislates the endless support of the crappy IOUs they print, in the form of their sweat equity from the people who need them to survive, you can farm out the process of creating wealth to some flat on it's ass banana farm, get the products for pennies, sell them to the people who are carrying your debt for you for 3000% profit and all you have to do is make sure that they have to kiss your ass rosy to get their hands on enough of the Monopoly money your political shills have helped you stuff up your ass in order to keep buying it.  We're a nation of honey boo boo serfs chasing a printout of a carrot on a platinum stick.  Money is debt and debt is a shackle and we're carrying all the debt for every billionaire in the country.  They have no debt.  They have gov assured debt notes from a gov that c can assure nothing because that gov is bankrupt.  We're holding markers for the people who never pay them off.


agree.    so, where does it end?  how does it end?
 
2013-09-17 12:36:26 PM  

marsoft: Nutsac_Jim: marsoft: Nutsac_Jim: PunGent:

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.

 People are paid exactly what they are worth.  If they don't like it, they can go work for a competitor who will easily see they are such a great value.

Slightly wrong.  People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept.  Worth is not an absolute.

What the hell does that mean.

If you take your comic book in to sell it, it is worth what someone will give you for it.  Its not worth some other value one wants.
If 100 other sellers are willing to accept 50$ for the same book, the book is worth 50$.

If everyone gets together and decides they wont sell it for less than 75, the book is worth 75.  It is absolutely worth 75.

Not if nobody will buy at 75.  Supply and demand.  It required agreement from both sides.


You are right.  I omitted that you eventually have the sale at 75.  Assuming you arent selling smegma, you will get it eventually.
Its even better for labor.  Nobody HAS to buy a comic book.   Businesses need workers though.
 
2013-09-17 12:37:17 PM  

marsoft: So to translate your long winded assertion.  You disagree with me.


So, to give you one last response to your endless dismissive posturing, it didn't need translating, it wasn't long winded and I think it's time you starting trying to piss from a great height on somebody without an umbrella.
 
2013-09-17 12:37:25 PM  
Nutsac_Jim: I'm sure you bought you house and car WITH CASH.

Yes, I did. Funny things happen when you save money. It grows into a bigger pile.


You're a farking liar.
 
2013-09-17 12:38:59 PM  

stir22: agree.    so, where does it end?  how does it end?


Historically?  Badly.  See, despite the avuncular assertions of a failed B actor sock puppet president, greed is not good.  And I'm talking big picture, all nine innings not good.
 
2013-09-17 12:40:06 PM  

Zeno-25: lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth.  Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

Actually, the main feature of capitalism is that workers aren't paid the full value of their labor. The people at the top live off of the surplus value created when workers are not paid the full market value of the end good/service they produce. Exploitation is a feature of capitalism, not a bug.


Let me know when you take out a mortgage on your house so you can start a business, and then only take the same pay as the lowest paid employee. .Now, it is not unheard of for a business owner to take $0 short term, to keep the business running.  I'm talking long term.  You are never allowed to take home,ever, for your efforts, than your lowest paid employee
 
2013-09-17 12:40:54 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: marsoft: Nutsac_Jim: marsoft: Nutsac_Jim: PunGent:

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth. Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

See that bold part?  You failed right there.  Logical fallacy, indicative of suffering from the Just World delusion.

 People are paid exactly what they are worth.  If they don't like it, they can go work for a competitor who will easily see they are such a great value.

Slightly wrong.  People are paid what they will accept, influenced by what others will accept.  Worth is not an absolute.

What the hell does that mean.

If you take your comic book in to sell it, it is worth what someone will give you for it.  Its not worth some other value one wants.
If 100 other sellers are willing to accept 50$ for the same book, the book is worth 50$.

If everyone gets together and decides they wont sell it for less than 75, the book is worth 75.  It is absolutely worth 75.

Not if nobody will buy at 75.  Supply and demand.  It required agreement from both sides.

You are right.  I omitted that you eventually have the sale at 75.  Assuming you arent selling smegma, you will get it eventually.
Its even better for labor.  Nobody HAS to buy a comic book.   Businesses need workers though.


The thing is if businesses get together and agree prices is it called price fixing and is illegal.  If workers to the same it is called collective bargaining and is legal.  I actually agree with this differentiation, but when laid out bare like that it is very hard to justify my support.
 
2013-09-17 12:41:28 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: stir22: Jobs that used to pay a living wage just dont anymore. I know and love people who make 8.50 an hour and are supposed to make ends meet on that. Food, shelter, gas insurance, etc. Couple that with t ...

EXACTLY.  you are much more eloquent than am i.   well-said.


If they chose to not stay in school and learn some knowledge, and also chose to not learn a marketable trade, then they deserve 8.50 an hour.

If you go out whoring at night and never use protection, then you deserve to get herpes.  That is the logical result of your action.


Christ, if you can't see anything beyond "Country Mouse, City Mouse" you really arent worth arguing with. Disregard my previous statement calling you an outrageous liar, even though you are.
 
2013-09-17 12:42:15 PM  

bunner: Cowboy Spencer: 1.  Public financing of campaigns.  (Right now, it's pretty much only rich people who can run for office)

Ever wonder why somebody would beg, borrow, mooch and cadge tens of millions of dollars to land a 400,000.00 a year temp civil service job?


Worked out great for Clinton.

Over the course of the next ten years after his Presidency, Clinton brought in roughly $8-10 million a year in speaking fees. In 2004, Clinton got $250,000 from Citigroup and $150,000 from Deutsche Bank. Goldman paid him $300,000 for two speeches, one in Paris. As the bubble peaked, in 2006, Clinton got $150,000 paydays each from Citigroup (twice), Lehman Brothers, the Mortgage Bankers Association, and the National Association of Realtors. In 2007, it was Goldman again, twice, Lehman, Citigroup, and Merrill Lynch.

All he had to do was destroy the middle class by enabling the end of American manufacturing jobs through NAFTA and permanent Most Favored Nation status for China.

Then he killed what was left of Glass Steagall.

Then he prevented the head of the CFTC from regulating derivatives.

Look how richly he was rewarded for serving his wealthy masters.
 
2013-09-17 12:44:35 PM  

bunner: Let's see who makes stuff.   China.

Let's see who doesn't.  Us.

Let's see who's economy is growing and who's economy is imploding.   Ha ha.


A simple and elegant truth. No amount of statistic manipulation and ideology can overcome this fact. Manufacturing is the bedrock of a countries wealth. The only way to get back on top is to return to a base of manufacturing. Raise taxes, lower taxes, raise welfare, lower welfare, provide housing for all or round the poors into camps and gas them, it won't make a drop of different in terms of wealth. Until we return to making a thing for 5 dollars and selling to someone in another country for 10, we won't be creating any more wealth in America.

Buying all our plastic garbage from China does nothing more than give a chunk to the Waltons and the rest goes out of the American financial ecosystem forever. Any commerce between Americans is just water swirling around the drain a couple times before disappearing into the hole in the floor.
 
2013-09-17 12:44:39 PM  

BullBearMS: bunner: Cowboy Spencer: 1.  Public financing of campaigns.  (Right now, it's pretty much only rich people who can run for office)

Ever wonder why somebody would beg, borrow, mooch and cadge tens of millions of dollars to land a 400,000.00 a year temp civil service job?

Worked out great for Clinton.

Over the course of the next ten years after his Presidency, Clinton brought in roughly $8-10 million a year in speaking fees. In 2004, Clinton got $250,000 from Citigroup and $150,000 from Deutsche Bank. Goldman paid him $300,000 for two speeches, one in Paris. As the bubble peaked, in 2006, Clinton got $150,000 paydays each from Citigroup (twice), Lehman Brothers, the Mortgage Bankers Association, and the National Association of Realtors. In 2007, it was Goldman again, twice, Lehman, Citigroup, and Merrill Lynch.

All he had to do was destroy the middle class by enabling the end of American manufacturing jobs through NAFTA and permanent Most Favored Nation status for China.

Then he killed what was left of Glass Steagall.

Then he prevented the head of the CFTC from regulating derivatives.

Look how richly he was rewarded for serving his wealthy masters.


that's what i was looking for.....thanks.  that's why i'm convinced that both political parties are just trolling us.
 
2013-09-17 12:44:45 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: So.. what you are saying is that it might actually make more sense to rent.  That way, when the company lays everyone off, you are not stuck with a huge albatross of a mortgage payment.  You can also move to where the jobs are now located, instead of being anchored down with your new property.  Oh, and when the AC breaks, you just call the landlord, instead of getting a home depot credit card to put the new 8500 AC unit on it.   (assuming the AC breaks right after you get shiattcanned, so HomeDepot doesnt know yet)


None of this even makes any sense. There aren't just jobs anywhere anyone wants one, any time, people, particularly the less well to do, can't just up and move any time it suits them, money into a mortgage, properly leveraged, still results in an investment, rent is wealth squandered, never to add to your wealth or lifestyle. And your final comment seemed to be you now advocating defaulting on debt. Having looked at your various responses over the course of this thread, it seems you're combining trolling with being poorly informed and lazy, all towards the ends of trying to dismiss anyone disenfranchised by the economy. That doesn't strike me as a good use of your time.
 
2013-09-17 12:45:02 PM  

bunner: marsoft: So to translate your long winded assertion.  You disagree with me.

So, to give you one last response to your endless dismissive posturing, it didn't need translating, it wasn't long winded and I think it's time you starting trying to piss from a great height on somebody without an umbrella.


Interesting how you waffle, use the biggest words you can thing of and use creative imagery to simply say, "I disagree with you" and then claim it is not long winded.

Keep on having fun with the imagery and attacking the person rather than what they are saying.  Well done, you are the soul of Fark.
 
2013-09-17 12:45:24 PM  

marsoft: The thing is if businesses get together and agree prices is it called price fixing and is illegal


SOmebody needs to tell gas stations that.
 
2013-09-17 12:45:29 PM  

BullBearMS: Look how richly he was rewarded for serving his wealthy masters.


They all are.  Hence the implied irony of "civil service job"
 
2013-09-17 12:47:56 PM  

Madbassist1: marsoft: The thing is if businesses get together and agree prices is it called price fixing and is illegal

SOmebody needs to tell gas stations that.


Yes they do!
 
2013-09-17 12:48:26 PM  

Madbassist1: Magnanimous_J: I think he's being facetious, but that is an interesting point. How should we define wealth? I'm definitely middle class. Last night I bought a pretty decent steak from the grocery store for about 5 bucks. That equates to about 10 minutes of work (before taxes). My electricity costs about I hour of work per month. My student loan payment is about 3 hours of work per month. Given that these middle class essentials are NOT a financial burden, how is taxing the rich more going to help me out?

My electricity bill was 350-400 bucks last month. If you make that in an hour, you are no longer middle class, bub.


I do live in an modern apartment building with concrete walls and no AC, but 400 bucks? Holy crap! How many swimming pools do you have at your house?
 
2013-09-17 12:50:21 PM  

marsoft: Interesting how you waffle, use the biggest words you can thing of and use creative imagery to simply say, "I disagree with you" and then claim it is not long winded.


Interesting how you endlessly try and foist off some sort dime store assessment of my contributions to support your obviously unimpeachable superiority.  P.S.  I actually speak English.  Get out your big word clicker.  And make the next one count, puddin', cause it's going to the mods.  So basically, stop pestering me with your snotty BS because it makes you look like you have nothing to say until I do.  And it's embarrassing.
 
2013-09-17 12:50:35 PM  
 Madbassist1: Nutsac_Jim: I'm sure you bought you house and car WITH CASH.

Yes, I did. Funny things happen when you save money. It grows into a bigger pile.

You're a farking liar.


Please.   I paid cash for my car and paid cash for my land.    I haven't build the house yet, simply because I don't want a mortgage
where if I cant pay for 4 months, the effing bank comes and takes it.
 
2013-09-17 12:52:13 PM  

bunner: marsoft: Interesting how you waffle, use the biggest words you can thing of and use creative imagery to simply say, "I disagree with you" and then claim it is not long winded.

Interesting how you endlessly try and foist off some sort dime store assessment of my contributions to support your obviously unimpeachable superiority.  P.S.  I actually speak English.  Get out your big word clicker.  And make the next one count, puddin', cause it's going to the mods.  So basically, stop pestering me with your snotty BS because it makes you look like you have nothing to say until I do.  And it's embarrassing.


Mod away.  You are the one who is repeatedly attacking me rather than what I am saying.  Have fun with that.
 
2013-09-17 12:52:30 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: What personal responsibilities did people abdicate that these people took advantage of to accumulate wealth?


For starters, they didn't accumulate, they inherited.

They are working very hard to not pay taxes, not pay employees, clean up messes after they've made them, working diligently to destroy whatever shreds of democracy are left in this country through super pacs like ALEC buying politicians... you know, common human decency stuff.
 
2013-09-17 12:53:23 PM  
So we are still blaming Reagan and Bush(s)? Wow - just wow.
 
2013-09-17 12:53:48 PM  
Madbassist1:  

Christ, if you can't see anything beyond "Country Mouse, City Mouse" you really arent worth arguing with. Disregard my previous statement calling you an outrageous liar, even though you are.

I'm sorry you cant defeat the logic of a fable.  Stay in school.   Enjoy your mortgage .
 
2013-09-17 12:54:16 PM  

Madbassist1: marsoft: The thing is if businesses get together and agree prices is it called price fixing and is illegal

SOmebody needs to tell gas stations that.


tou-farking-che.
 
2013-09-17 12:55:13 PM  

marsoft: You are the one who is repeatedly attacking me


marsoft: Interesting how you waffle, use the biggest words you can thing of


marsoft: So to translate your long winded assertion.


marsoft: I am saying your posting was redundant


I've seen this movie with the original cast.  Are you through yet?  I'll bet a million dollars you're not.
 
2013-09-17 12:56:27 PM  

bunner: marsoft: You are the one who is repeatedly attacking me

marsoft: Interesting how you waffle, use the biggest words you can thing of

marsoft: So to translate your long winded assertion.

marsoft: I am saying your posting was redundant

I've seen this movie with the original cast.  Are you through yet?  I'll bet a million dollars you're not.


You know it takes two people to keep this going.  Are you through yet?
 
2013-09-17 12:56:56 PM  

Realist29: So we are still blaming Reagan and Bush(s)? Wow - just wow.


It is a very useful notion that people who are hired to break things that take decades to finally break are somehow absolved as soon as somebody else gets hired.  that's why we're allowed to vote for the new scapegoat.
 
2013-09-17 12:58:13 PM  

marsoft: You know it takes two people to keep this going.  Are you through yet?


Oh, I get it.  Sorry. You're a "last word" troll.  Hit it, Petunia.  :  )
 
2013-09-17 12:58:23 PM  

VendorXeno: None of this even makes any sense. There aren't just jobs anywhere anyone wants one, any time, people, particularly the less well to do, can't just up and move any time it suits them


Of course they can.  They just don't want to.   This is nothing new.   You can either go to where the jobs are located, or you can stay home and use 'taking care of ma and pa' as an excuse.  Yes or no, are there states where the unemployment rate is 2%?  Yes.
Are there states where the unemployment rate is 2% and it is like living in Miami ?  No.
 
2013-09-17 01:00:46 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Mr_Fabulous: Magnanimous_J: The rich get richer, that's the way of the world. But by concentrating on hating the wealthy for their wealth doesn't put another dollar in your pocket. You can tax them to oblivion if it makes you feel better, but it won't fix anything.

400 families get $2 trillion. Taxing that $2 trillion "into oblivion" would, in fact, fix a whole lot of shiat, and fast!   But no one is arguing that "oblivion" strawman point in the first place, so who farking cares?

What are you going to do for money in year two of your glorious tax plan?


Contribute to an adult literacy program for you, I suppose.
 
2013-09-17 01:02:21 PM  

bunner: marsoft: You know it takes two people to keep this going.  Are you through yet?

Oh, I get it.  Sorry. You're a "last word" troll.  Hit it, Petunia.  :  )


Look you disagree with my postings.  I get that.  But seriously, you then went into name calling and finished with saying I am a troll.  Finally a "last word" troll.  Considering you were trying to get in the last word, that is funny. You must admit that trying to get the last word in by calling someone a "last word" troll is funny.
 
2013-09-17 01:03:03 PM  
VendorXeno:  

None of this even makes any sense. There aren't just jobs anywhere anyone wants one, any time, people, particularly the less well to do, can't just up and move any time it suits them,

Of course they can  There are places where unemployemnt is 2%, less than the full employment rate, and where they will GIVE you land.
Take half an unemployment check and get on a Greyhound.
 
2013-09-17 01:06:43 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Of course they can. They just don't want to. This is nothing new. You can either go to where the jobs are located, or you can stay home and use 'taking care of ma and pa' as an excuse. Yes or no, are there states where the unemployment rate is 2%? Yes.
Are there states where the unemployment rate is 2% and it is like living in Miami ? No.


this used to be the case...anymore, not so much.  if you truly believe that you have been living in a vacuum for a decade or so.
 
2013-09-17 01:10:21 PM  
Jobs means somebody is making a sh*t ton of money in order to pay you some scraps of said money to bring it in the door.  There's not a lot of things left that offer not opportunity anymore.  In an era of "If we can't make 100 billion in ten years, pump and dump the stock and board the joint up, why bother?", honest work is hard to find.  The social contract is now neatly printed out on a roll of bumrag in the marble festooned stall of some corporate sh*tter.  Progress.
 
2013-09-17 01:11:20 PM  
that offer THAT opportunity ...  ah kinnae type fer toffee.
 
2013-09-17 01:12:13 PM  

Carn: DeathByGeekSquad: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

Is this the thread where people have no job creativity and expect to make millions as a cubicle drone?

This is the thread where certain people who are doing just fine themselves TYVM, remind the droolers and the knuckle draggers that historically, both in our country and in others, this type of wealth inequality has led to massive financial upheaval at best (Great Depression, many other financial Panics), and at worst to violent revolution (French, Russian, Mexican et al).  There are reasonable, pragmatic steps we can take, which we had in place at various times in the last 100 years when our country was doing better than it is now, which would help to set things on a more equal footing in the future.  But go ahead and pretend like the only thing going on here is jealousy.


I hate to tell you this, but the Great Depression wasn't caused by wealth inequality.
 
2013-09-17 01:12:37 PM  
FWIW, I freely admit that when people start blowing me sh*t with false assertions of cheaply crafted inferences, that I rely on the reading comprehension skill of the bulk of forum users to assess who's doing what.  Then again, it is my opinion that the second you starting getting douchebaggy with another user in order to "make a point", you have none.  Just trying to be informative.  Thanks.

[themoreyouknow.jpg]
 
2013-09-17 01:14:30 PM  

bunner: stir22: agree.    so, where does it end?  how does it end?

Historically?  Badly.  See, despite the avuncular assertions of a failed B actor sock puppet president, greed is not good.  And I'm talking big picture, all nine innings not good.


time frame?  personally, i think we're getting closer.  exponentially closer.
 
2013-09-17 01:14:35 PM  
Thank goodness. I was really worried about them.
 
2013-09-17 01:15:08 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Zeno-25: lordaction: dready zim: lordaction: Typical liberals wanting to steal money from the people that earned it.

You mean the workers? Not the business owners? The workers did all the work, it`s sort of how they are defined...

Do you think someone earned the money who wasn`t the person who did the work? How does that work?

The workers get a paycheck, don't they?  They are paid what they are worth.  Your communist dogma is nothing more then a weak rationalization to steal - says a lot about your character.  I'm guessing you must be an atheist.

Actually, the main feature of capitalism is that workers aren't paid the full value of their labor. The people at the top live off of the surplus value created when workers are not paid the full market value of the end good/service they produce. Exploitation is a feature of capitalism, not a bug.

Let me know when you take out a mortgage on your house so you can start a business, and then only take the same pay as the lowest paid employee. .Now, it is not unheard of for a business owner to take $0 short term, to keep the business running.  I'm talking long term.  You are never allowed to take home,ever, for your efforts, than your lowest paid employee


English, do you speak it?
 
2013-09-17 01:15:15 PM  

Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.


Wages are determined by supply and demand. Start a business yourself and see. Pay your burger-flippers $30 per hour with full benefits and see how quickly you go bankrupt. There's a reason why VPs make more than janitors, and it's not because the owner likes the VPs more than he does the janitors.
 
2013-09-17 01:16:06 PM  

Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth


Why not? The megawealthy are gaming the system and have no problem taking wealth. Nothing wrong with crashing the economy, forcing people out of work, then seizing people's homes when they can't pay the mortgage. All, I might add, while using their victims' tax dollars to insulate themselves from any losses or risk.

The only difference is they do it "legally" by buying the people who make the laws. The real tragedy is that we have the usual Fark shills in this thread who are being forced to bend over and squeal like a pig just like the rest of us. The difference is they like it and squeal for more.
 
2013-09-17 01:16:42 PM  
Is a douchebaggy a thing one can knit?

I mean...it's a sort of a bag, right?
 
2013-09-17 01:17:24 PM  

VendorXeno: None of this even makes any sense. There aren't just jobs anywhere anyone wants one, any time, people, particularly the less well to do, can't just up and move any time it suits them, money into a mortgage, properly leveraged, still results in an investment, rent is wealth squandered, never to add to your wealth or lifestyle. And your final comment seemed to be you now advocating defaulting on debt. Having looked at your various responses over the course of this thread, it seems you're combining trolling with being poorly informed and lazy, all towards the ends of trying to dismiss anyone disenfranchised by the economy. That doesn't strike me as a good use of your time.


How does "save up some effing money" equate to me advocating defaulting on debt?  There is a time and a place for a mortgage.  Getting one  when you cant afford one, and cant afford to repair your own house, is not one of them.

I was simply pointing outthat rent is not necessarily 'throwing money away'.   'Rent is wealth squandered' is not universal.

What value is 'being able to move when you want' ?   If your local economy tanks, how much is it to get rent somewhere else?  $0.
Let us say you live in a mining town with one large employer.   Company moves all jobs to India.   Your house immediately loses 20% simply because a lot of other people are now selling too.   Now you have to sell.  Lose another 10% in selling costs.  Can you even sell?
How is that investment/foreclosure now?

Its not like we didn't just see a ton of people go 20% underwater.  This isn't fantasy.

That $8500 Home Depot deal, thats a play out of my buddies playbook.  He bought a new house with a fat morgage for $540K.  He then saw his  house go to $410K.   This year, his AC failed and he had to replace it at almost $10,000.  It is on a credit card.

Why? Because he and his wife didnt want to live in a tiny house.  They wanted a nice new house to show off how successful they were.


A mortgage, properly placed by income potential of the property, can be effective.  The problem is that most people will get max loan they can get, just because the bank will do it.   That isn't wise.    Rent is not necessarily 'throwing money away'
 
2013-09-17 01:17:54 PM  

stir22: BullBearMS: bunner: Cowboy Spencer: 1.  Public financing of campaigns.  (Right now, it's pretty much only rich people who can run for office)

Ever wonder why somebody would beg, borrow, mooch and cadge tens of millions of dollars to land a 400,000.00 a year temp civil service job?

Worked out great for Clinton.

Over the course of the next ten years after his Presidency, Clinton brought in roughly $8-10 million a year in speaking fees. In 2004, Clinton got $250,000 from Citigroup and $150,000 from Deutsche Bank. Goldman paid him $300,000 for two speeches, one in Paris. As the bubble peaked, in 2006, Clinton got $150,000 paydays each from Citigroup (twice), Lehman Brothers, the Mortgage Bankers Association, and the National Association of Realtors. In 2007, it was Goldman again, twice, Lehman, Citigroup, and Merrill Lynch.

All he had to do was destroy the middle class by enabling the end of American manufacturing jobs through NAFTA and permanent Most Favored Nation status for China.

Then he killed what was left of Glass Steagall.

Then he prevented the head of the CFTC from regulating derivatives.

Look how richly he was rewarded for serving his wealthy masters.

that's what i was looking for.....thanks.  that's why i'm convinced that both political parties are just trolling us.


You're welcome. The sad truth is that the leadership of both parties are definitely owned by the very same obscenely wealthy few.

Look at how they just worked together to save the Bush Tax cuts from finally expiring as scheduled.

/OMG if we let them expire when they are supposed to, it's the FISCAL CLIFF!!1!!
 
2013-09-17 01:18:52 PM  

DrPainMD: I hate to tell you this, but the Great Depression wasn't caused by wealth inequality.


AFAICR, it was another case, the first, of the bookie joint sh*tting the bed.    Once upon a time, briefly, mostly after WWII, there was lots of jobs, lots of growth and lots of things in place to keep the books balanced.  "Don't worry.  The people who own the businesses know they have it good, and if they get too big for their britches - become a detriment to the economy that serves them, too - the government will step in".

And for a bit, that was true.

And for the last 35 years, the corporate mob has had their dick so far up the dog's ass that the poor pooch had pubes in it's teeth and the government responded by bringing dump trucks full of KY jelly and dancing girls peeling grapes.  The game got flipped.  The motivations changed.  The guard rails got pulled up and melted down into truncheons.

See that dog?  That dog is f*cked.
 
2013-09-17 01:20:25 PM  

DrPainMD: Carn: DeathByGeekSquad: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

Is this the thread where people have no job creativity and expect to make millions as a cubicle drone?

This is the thread where certain people who are doing just fine themselves TYVM, remind the droolers and the knuckle draggers that historically, both in our country and in others, this type of wealth inequality has led to massive financial upheaval at best (Great Depression, many other financial Panics), and at worst to violent revolution (French, Russian, Mexican et al).  There are reasonable, pragmatic steps we can take, which we had in place at various times in the last 100 years when our country was doing better than it is now, which would help to set things on a more equal footing in the future.  But go ahead and pretend like the only thing going on here is jealousy.

I hate to tell you this, but the Great Depression wasn't caused by wealth inequality.


Caused directly?  No, but it was a major factor that the depression was so bad and long lasting.
 
2013-09-17 01:20:55 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: If your local economy tanks, how much is it to get rent somewhere else? $0.


Wow.

Really? How?

I'd sure like to pay $0 rent.
 
2013-09-17 01:22:02 PM  

Ant: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

No, this is the thread where people act like there's nothing wrong with the fact that the wealthy 1% own the vast majority of everything.


It doesn't matter what other people own, or how much of it they own. If you earn money, you can buy your own stuff... as much as you can afford. Believe me, nobody is stuck with cash because there's nothing to buy. I'm not even remotely close to being in the 1%, but I have cars, motorcycles, a boat, a nice home with all the modern conveniences and a pool in the back yard. The 1% haven't stopped me from living the good life.
 
2013-09-17 01:23:28 PM  
 Zeno-25:  

English, do you speak it?

No I do not.  I skipped those classes to attend some "I deserve to get paid as much as everyone else' seminars.
 
2013-09-17 01:24:40 PM  

bunner: DrPainMD: I hate to tell you this, but the Great Depression wasn't caused by wealth inequality.

AFAICR, it was another case, the first, of the bookie joint sh*tting the bed.    Once upon a time, briefly, mostly after WWII, there was lots of jobs, lots of growth and lots of things in place to keep the books balanced.  "Don't worry.  The people who own the businesses know they have it good, and if they get too big for their britches - become a detriment to the economy that serves them, too - the government will step in".

And for a bit, that was true.

And for the last 35 years, the corporate mob has had their dick so far up the dog's ass that the poor pooch had pubes in it's teeth and the government responded by bringing dump trucks full of KY jelly and dancing girls peeling grapes.  The game got flipped.  The motivations changed.  The guard rails got pulled up and melted down into truncheons.

See that dog?  That dog is f*cked.


Wages after WW2 weren't high because bosses were generous, they were high due to supply and demand. Bosses then, just like today, paid as little as they could possibly get away with, and not a penny more.
 
2013-09-17 01:25:54 PM  

Carn: DrPainMD:  I hate to tell you this, but the Great Depression wasn't caused by wealth inequality.

Caused directly?  No, but it was a major factor that the depression was so bad and long lasting.


How did 'Wealth Inequality' raise taxes in a depression?
 
2013-09-17 01:28:43 PM  

stir22: time frame?  personally, i think we're getting closer.  exponentially closer.


Look for -  Major shift in currency valuation. China flexing on us and buying up American properties. Another ostensibly inevitable hiccup at the the bookie joint on Wall St. and for it to take another entire market sector with it.

ATM, our currency is sucking wind and they need to find somebody to buy up more of our debt, which is all currency is, to keep it afloat.  Watch very closely as to who buys that debt and what they do in the next ten years.

This isn't Jennifer government.  The people running this business plan to it's logical conclusion have no flag, no god, and no country and they can't wait to dismantle the impediments of such notions in order to get the sh*t through the goose.

"Yeah, we blew more sh*t up.  If you remove these obstacles to our profiteering, we wont have to blow anything else up."  Investment bankers are terrorists.  Corporations are just board markers.  There's just a few players left.  And when the etch a sketch gets shaken, to stretch the metaphor, the people moving those markers on the board are going to make damn sure they're holding it.  Some men just want to see the world burn, as long as they can view it from a third story window in a gated mansion.  Anybody who actually believes that this can continue forever cause "AMERICA!" should read up on a few other ordained and exceptional nations that aren't here anymore.
 
2013-09-17 01:29:03 PM  

DrPainMD: Ant: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

No, this is the thread where people act like there's nothing wrong with the fact that the wealthy 1% own the vast majority of everything.

It doesn't matter what other people own, or how much of it they own. If you earn money, you can buy your own stuff... as much as you can afford. Believe me, nobody is stuck with cash because there's nothing to buy. I'm not even remotely close to being in the 1%, but I have cars, motorcycles, a boat, a nice home with all the modern conveniences and a pool in the back yard. The 1% haven't stopped me from living the good life.


Wealth disparity has implications for the rest of society and causes serious macroeconomic problems. If you bothered to study history rather than make excuses for systemic inequities you would know that. But keep burrying your head in the sand and telling yourself the real problem is people not working hard enough, and that massive wealth concentration in a very small group of people isn't a problem for everyone. It's not like there's hundreds of years of history in dozens countries that suggest human societies work otherwise.
 
2013-09-17 01:29:04 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: How does "save up some effing money" equate to me advocating defaulting on debt?  There is a time and a place for a mortgage.  Getting one  when you cant afford one, and cant afford to repair your own house, is not one of them.


I already explained this, in detail. Time isn't static, what may seem like the time now may suddenly change with a shift in the economy, and taking the risk is effectively a requirement for retaining enough of what you dump your wealth into to improve your quality of life over time, as opposed to living at the edge of poverty and disaster because you keep throwing all of your money away.

So this is : really obvious to most people and b: something I already explained in detail and you still didn't feel like taking the ten seconds to think about it enough to try and grasp it. Good job. I'll be moving on to more promising conversations from this point.
 
2013-09-17 01:30:18 PM  
I feel like this thread and the one where people will believe what they want to believe regardless of facts should be merged.
 
2013-09-17 01:30:34 PM  

Kittypie070: Nutsac_Jim: If your local economy tanks, how much is it to get rent somewhere else? $0.

Wow.

Really? How?

I'd sure like to pay $0 rent.


I didnt say rent was free.  It costs you $0 to choose to get a different landlord.

vs the cost of selling a house in order to buy a house elsewhere, you know.. so you do not 'throw rent down the drain'.
 
2013-09-17 01:31:20 PM  

DrPainMD: Bosses then, just like today, paid as little as they could possibly get away with, and not a penny more.


Until the people who brought the money in the door started telling them that they weren't gonna stop by and make them 50,000.00 in 8 hours, today.

upworthy-production.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2013-09-17 01:36:22 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Kittypie070: Nutsac_Jim: If your local economy tanks, how much is it to get rent somewhere else? $0.

Wow.

Really? How?

I'd sure like to pay $0 rent.


I didnt say rent was free.   It costs you $0 to choose to get a different landlord.

vs the cost of selling a house in order to buy a house elsewhere, you know.. so you do not 'throw rent down the drain'.


It does?

So yay, I never ever need to pay a security deposit ever again, huh?

And it doesn't cost even a nickel to rent a truck to move my stuff?
 
2013-09-17 01:37:10 PM  

VendorXeno: Nutsac_Jim: How does "save up some effing money" equate to me advocating defaulting on debt?  There is a time and a place for a mortgage.  Getting one  when you cant afford one, and cant afford to repair your own house, is not one of them.

I already explained this, in detail. Time isn't static, what may seem like the time now may suddenly change with a shift in the economy, and taking the risk is effectively a requirement for retaining enough of what you dump your wealth into to improve your quality of life over time, as opposed to living at the edge of poverty and disaster because you keep throwing all of your money away.

So this is : really obvious to most people and b: something I already explained in detail and you still didn't feel like taking the ten seconds to think about it enough to try and grasp it. Good job. I'll be moving on to more promising conversations from this point.


YAWN.   You dont break even for 5 years.  So if you change jobs within 5 years, you lose money.  Nice.  If the economy is as 'shifty' as you say, then that is even more reason to rent.

I dont think it makes as much sense to everyone else as you think it does, because you are the only one here saying it.

And by the way, if you are 25 and on the edge of poverty, you have no business owning a home on loan.   You are not going to be able to afford anything new, so you are going to be exposed to expensive repairs.   These repairs, you will not be able to fix, because you are on the edge of poverty.
 
2013-09-17 01:40:50 PM  

Kittypie070: Nutsac_Jim: Kittypie070: Nutsac_Jim: If your local economy tanks, how much is it to get rent somewhere else? $0.

Wow.

Really? How?

I'd sure like to pay $0 rent.

I didnt say rent was free.   It costs you $0 to choose to get a different landlord.

vs the cost of selling a house in order to buy a house elsewhere, you know.. so you do not 'throw rent down the drain'.

It does?

So yay, I never ever need to pay a security deposit ever again, huh?


And it doesn't cost even a nickel to rent a truck to move my stuff?

Do you get your security deposit back when you leave?    You do?   But But But.

Let me know of the magic moving company that moves all your shiat for free, simply because you had a mortgage.
 
2013-09-17 01:43:27 PM  
Nothing in America lasts more than a year unless it moves money around.  Money IS the government.  Wealth redistribution IS an economy.  When it stops moving around, despite the fact that the people hoarding it all INSIST that it must, the people who hoard it and AREN'T moving it around are holding forth the spyglass and looking for the next juicy piece of "undeveloped" ass.  Vote with your wallets.  The ballots are a wank.
 
2013-09-17 01:45:30 PM  
Nutsac_Jim: If your local economy tanks, how much is it to get rent somewhere else? $0.

That's the claim you made, and you're trying to get ME to back it up?

Fark you.
 
2013-09-17 01:51:39 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Carn: DrPainMD:  I hate to tell you this, but the Great Depression wasn't caused by wealth inequality.

Caused directly?  No, but it was a major factor that the depression was so bad and long lasting.

How did 'Wealth Inequality' raise taxes in a depression?


What?
 
2013-09-17 01:58:35 PM  
I wish I could simply post this as a reply to at least 100 people in this thread, but I am going to post it here.

My parents worked their asses off. My dad worked 16 hour days for months on end when asked, and he was promoted "on schedule" his work career. He worked for the largest company in the US (GE), doing what many like to call "real work" (Jet Engine assembly) He is an Air Force vet, and he did everything they said you needed to do. Mom worked there too.

With two kids and a modest house in (mostly) rural Southwest Ohio they tried to make a family.

I rarely saw my parents growing up because they were almost always at work when I was awake.

We vacationed modestly (a week in Georgia at a family friends house) two times in 18 years.

We didn't have enough for me and my sister to go to college, but we had enough that no one went hungry and we had doctors and food and clothes.

Mt grandfather worked for GE as well, and my grandmother raised 4 kids, and a housefull of grandchildren so that her kids could work to achieve better than they themselves had.

Fast forward 25 years.

Grandpa is dead, not surprisingly, but his wasting illness destroyed most of the family funds because GE cut health care for pensioners. He gave them his best years, they promised to take care of him. They lied.

Dad is in his 70's, working part time to keep the lights on. He retired late, and then 10 years later his pension is now a joke. Almost all the money is gone. It is less than 20% of what he was promised.

401K? HA! Lost in 2008.. "sorry . we made some bad deals in real estate"

He's close to losing his house. He can't afford to keep paying for my Grandmothers care (once again, that was supposed to be covered by GE and the Government, but NOPE.. Times are tough.. we lied!)

He can't even afford to fix the injuries caused by doing the job the company made him do. Most of his contemporaries are either dead or in a wheelchair due to knee or back injuries.

GE isn't gonna fix it. They were supposed to. That was the deal. Help us, we'll take care of you.

Most of my entire extended family gave the best of their lives to the biggest company in the USA, and that company turned its back on them, and left them to rot, literally, in "the shareholders interest"

Now they are coming after my grandmothers meager savings to pay her taxes.

Think about that for a minute. This woman has never had a new car. Her husband flew in the battle of Midway and she raised two families after the war. He built her a house and a 10 acre farm with his two hands. The company and the country said they would take care of her. That was the deal. Now they have threatened her with Jail because she can't pay her taxes while living in a nursing home with no assets left to her name... and she is CONTEMPLATING LETTING THEM PUT HER IN JAIL so she is not a burden to the family that can no longer afford to pay her medical bills.

Dad is crushed that he can't afford to fix it, and I am living paycheck to paycheck with no medical insurance.

What the hell has this nation become when that story is not exceptional.. not even uncommon?
 
2013-09-17 02:03:27 PM  
The New Deal was simple.  If the motherf*ckers who tanked the joint wont get off the dime and move the money around to do what money does, we'll create programs to do it for them.  Any time you want to see who is actually trying to take the dick out of the dog, look for the one person with any leverage at all who is utterly excoriated, despised and hated by the wealthy.  All of the tax exemptions these first families pissed and moaned and lobbied and shilled for was just to make sure that if New Deal v.2.0 got launched, this time all that necessary work and economic movement wouldn't be accomplished with any of THEIR money.
 
2013-09-17 02:05:32 PM  
farm8.staticflickr.com
The world needs ditch-diggers too.
 
2013-09-17 02:06:13 PM  

DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?


No it's the thread where we point out how corporations that make billions are able to effectively not only not pay taxes, but get money back that the rest of us plebs pay in taxes.  And how the government supports this almost unilaterally (both dems and repubs)
 
2013-09-17 02:06:13 PM  

Zizzowop: [farm8.staticflickr.com image 500x362]
The world needs ditch-diggers too.


You hiring?
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-09-17 02:07:14 PM  

Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid


How EVER did you get that resultant formation from what Carn wrote?
Did you run that through an english=>derp translator?
 
2013-09-17 02:09:21 PM  
Assuming that all of this extra cash is not stuffed into mattresses somewhere, it's going to be put somewhere useful. Even sitting in a bank account or mutual fund, it's going to be funneled back into the economy through loans, investments, and yes, even payroll for new jobs.
 
2013-09-17 02:09:53 PM  

Infernalist: HotWingConspiracy: Infernalist: OnlyM3: HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig
Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.

So, you think that the bad economy of the late 80s is because of Bush sr.?   lol  oh god, it burns.

Hyper conservatism can never be wrong.

What we need is 20 straight years of Democratic control of the WH and congress.  No more of this '8 years and hand off' bullshiat.  We need a solid decade of Democratic control of the government so that we can 'see' what can come of it.  And then let the American people decide if the GOP alternatives are better or not.

Because right now, it's stupid.  We let the GOP fark things up with foreign wars and obscene tax cuts and cronyism and all but open bribery in the government at the highest level...and when shiat goes south, they throw up a lamb to be slaughtered after 8 years and the Democrats take over.

Democrats spend 8 years fixing the GOP fark ups and disasters and get us out of the wars and the whole time, the GOP is snarking and complaining about how the Democrats aren't fixing things fast enough.  And at the end of the 8 years, they talk about integrity of the office and how corrupt the Democrats are and weak on crime and our enemies are laughing at us...etc etc etc...

And we vote them back in and they go right back to provoking foreign wars and looting the government for as much as they can, and we continually have the unmitigated gall to act SURPRISED.

fark that.  2016 needs to be the point where we give the Democrats another 8 years in the WH.


Oh how cute, you think Democrats and Republicans are really any different than each other.

s22.postimg.org

/liberal
//the Overton window on political ideology in 'murica starts center right, and goes farther right.
 
2013-09-17 02:10:20 PM  

Magnanimous_J: Madbassist1: Magnanimous_J: I think he's being facetious, but that is an interesting point. How should we define wealth? I'm definitely middle class. Last night I bought a pretty decent steak from the grocery store for about 5 bucks. That equates to about 10 minutes of work (before taxes). My electricity costs about I hour of work per month. My student loan payment is about 3 hours of work per month. Given that these middle class essentials are NOT a financial burden, how is taxing the rich more going to help me out?

My electricity bill was 350-400 bucks last month. If you make that in an hour, you are no longer middle class, bub.

I do live in an modern apartment building with concrete walls and no AC, but 400 bucks? Holy crap! How many swimming pools do you have at your house?


Im electric only. No gas.


Nutsac_Jim: Madbassist1: Nutsac_Jim: I'm sure you bought you house and car WITH CASH.

Yes, I did. Funny things happen when you save money. It grows into a bigger pile.

You're a farking liar.

Please.   I paid cash for my car and paid cash for my land.    I haven't build the house yet, simply because I don't want a mortgage
where if I cant pay for 4 months, the effing bank comes and takes it.


Oh, I get it. You're a minor liar, n ot an outrageous one. Still a farking liar.
 
2013-09-17 02:11:14 PM  
Whose side on you on? Evil corporations or whiny underachievers?
 
2013-09-17 02:12:10 PM  

Loadmaster: Assuming that all of this extra cash is not stuffed into mattresses somewhere, it's going to be put somewhere useful. Even sitting in a bank account or mutual fund, it's going to be funneled back into the economy through loans, investments, and yes, even payroll for new jobs.


And yet.
 
2013-09-17 02:12:16 PM  

Zizzowop: [farm8.staticflickr.com image 500x362]
The world needs ditch-diggers too. I have zero imagination so I'm gonna sh*t out a stupid rich-boy platitude


Oh gods, STFU.
 
2013-09-17 02:13:18 PM  
The recent 60 Minutes spot with the two MIT researchers talking about automation made me think that we're basically going to have to move towards an expanded welfare state, where it's easy to get on the dole and easy to stay on it.

Technology is always creating jobs, Brynjolfsson told Kroft. "It's always destroying jobs. But right now the pace is accelerating. It's faster we think than ever before in history. So as a consequence, we are not creating jobs at the same pace that we need to."
"And we ain't seen nothing yet," McAfee added.

Now, a lot of farkers might think, "Fine, I work in {some field that requires knowledge work or human interaction} so I'm not going anywhere", but as time goes on and the big operaions become more and more automated, locking in the wealth for the stakeholders and leaving fewer and fewer entry-level opportunities, there is going to be a lot of pressure to beef up the safety net.
 
2013-09-17 02:13:32 PM  

doubled99: Whose side on you on? Evil corporations or whiny underachievers?


Both are wrong, so I am on the side of snide self important twits. (Yes I mean my side)
 
2013-09-17 02:14:03 PM  
 If your grandpa is 75 and is going to lose his house because of real estate taxes, then
it is time for the grandkids to pass on the new ipad this year and stick it out with last years ipad3 for another 6 months and pay granddaddies tax bill.
 
2013-09-17 02:15:16 PM  

DrPainMD: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Wages are determined by supply and demand. Start a business yourself and see. Pay your burger-flippers $30 per hour with full benefits and see how quickly you go bankrupt. There's a reason why VPs make more than janitors, and it's not because the owner likes the VPs more than he does the janitors.


The janitor does more work, and I think that is a large part of the farking issue.
 
2013-09-17 02:15:22 PM  

gja: Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid

How EVER did you get that resultant formation from what Carn wrote?
Did you run that through an english=>derp translator?


I was hoping that I was being so reasonable that his only move was throwing the ball into left field.  Also, thanks!
 
2013-09-17 02:17:23 PM  

Shadow Blasko: Think about that for a minute. This woman has never had a new car. Her husband flew in the battle of Midway and she raised two families after the war. He built her a house and a 10 acre farm with his two hands. The company and the country said they would take care of her. That was the deal. Now they have threatened her with Jail because she can't pay her taxes while living in a nursing home with no assets left to her name... and she is CONTEMPLATING LETTING THEM PUT HER IN JAIL so she is not a burden to the family that can no longer afford to pay her medical bills.


Your county doesnt have a plan where they stop collecting real estate taxes on old assed people until they die?
 
2013-09-17 02:18:11 PM  

gja: Joe Blowme: Carn: There you go. Who expects to make millions (per year) as a cubicle drone? You're going with the tried and true Bootstraps argument. All poor people, every single one of them, is poor, because they just aren't trying hard enough, right?

And then there is you on the other side of the argument, all rich people did not earn it but instead robbed poor people to get rich.

/both are stupid

How EVER did you get that resultant formation from what Carn wrote?
Did you run that through an english=>derp translator?


why yes, i made it myself from legos
 
2013-09-17 02:21:30 PM  

Madbassist1: Magnanimous_J: Madbassist1: Magnanimous_J: I think he's being facetious, but that is an interesting point. How should we define wealth? I'm definitely middle class. Last night I bought a pretty decent steak from the grocery store for about 5 bucks. That equates to about 10 minutes of work (before taxes). My electricity costs about I hour of work per month. My student loan payment is about 3 hours of work per month. Given that these middle class essentials are NOT a financial burden, how is taxing the rich more going to help me out?

My electricity bill was 350-400 bucks last month. If you make that in an hour, you are no longer middle class, bub.

I do live in an modern apartment building with concrete walls and no AC, but 400 bucks? Holy crap! How many swimming pools do you have at your house?

Im electric only. No gas.


Nutsac_Jim: Madbassist1: Nutsac_Jim: I'm sure you bought you house and car WITH CASH.

Yes, I did. Funny things happen when you save money. It grows into a bigger pile.

You're a farking liar.

Please.   I paid cash for my car and paid cash for my land.    I haven't build the house yet, simply because I don't want a mortgage
where if I cant pay for 4 months, the effing bank comes and takes it.

Oh, I get it. You're a minor liar, n ot an outrageous one. Still a farking liar.


You shut your whore mouth.  I lied about nothing.  I paid cash for the car.  I paid cash for the land.  I rent until it is the right time to build.  I do not have a mortgage.
There is no loan to 'not be able to pay' and have the bank take it.
 
2013-09-17 02:22:00 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Your county doesnt have a plan where they stop collecting real estate taxes on old assed people until they die?


B-b-b-but leeches!

Really. STFU.
 
2013-09-17 02:22:05 PM  
Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "

We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.
 
2013-09-17 02:22:34 PM  

Barnstormer: The recent 60 Minutes spot with the two MIT researchers talking about automation made me think that we're basically going to have to move towards an expanded welfare state, where it's easy to get on the dole and easy to stay on it.


Here's a plan.

How about a robust and well regulated capitalist engine that has it's principle allegiances to the country that hosts it's wealth base and produces not only profits, but a fair and equatable tax base that uses a socialist model to serve all common needs - medicine, housing, transportation, water and power infrastructure, etc - and nobody gets screwed or left out or favored, and then add a dollop of communism to asses individual needs and abilities so that the socialist, erection to resurrection education system can best give them a wheel to put their shoulder to?

Warning.

This plan contains very obvious points that are as plain as the balls on a tall dog, but would surely have Stalin and Khrushchev eating kittens in the streets and putting infants on spikes and America would crumble to ruin.  Much like now.  Oddly.
 
2013-09-17 02:25:33 PM  

CrazyCracka420: Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "

We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.


Yep, perhaps the most misinterpreted thing old Benny ever said. It wasn't poor people voting themselves the treasury that Franklin was talking about.
 
2013-09-17 02:26:48 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Your county doesnt have a plan where they stop collecting real estate taxes on old assed people until they die?


Honestly I am note sure what the taxes are based on.

They sold the farm when grandpa died to pay the medical bills and because my grandmother could not keep it up herself. They didn't get much for it.

She went into a nursing home soon after. I guess the taxes are on what is left of grandpa's life insurance or something, I am honestly not sure.

She has a couple level 2 wounds from a skin infection (not sure what that means exactly, but they have her on the medical side of the nursing home, and we have to pay for the regular side apartment as well.. it costs like 6 grand a month) (if we let her apartment go on the residential side of the nursing home there is a year wait to get back in, so you have to pay both at once, and insurance will NOT cover anything like that)
 
2013-09-17 02:27:08 PM  
How about a robust and well regulated capitalist engine that has it's principle allegiances to the country that hosts it's wealth base and produces not only profits, but a fair and equatable tax base that uses a socialist model to serve all common needs - medicine, housing, transportation, water and power infrastructure, etc - and nobody gets screwed or left out or favored, and then add a dollop of communism to asses individual needs and abilities so that the socialist, erection to resurrection education system can best give them a wheel to put their shoulder to?

Wow, that sounds so perfect!  And then we can implement some sort of education policy that ensures all people treat others with love and respect. No more wars or sadness, either!
 
2013-09-17 02:28:03 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: If your grandpa is 75 and is going to lose his house because of real estate taxes, then
it is time for the grandkids to pass on the new ipad this year and stick it out with last years ipad3 for another 6 months and pay granddaddies tax bill.


You arent near as smart as you think you are. Your libertarian ideology will keep you sleeping on that rocky patch of ground you formerly claimed held a house you paid for with cash.
 
2013-09-17 02:29:11 PM  

Headso: At this point...


[i40.tinypic.com image 450x340]


Can someone also toss Clinton into this picture too?  They're all corporate whores, the lot of em.

img.fark.net
 
2013-09-17 02:32:35 PM  

CrazyCracka420: Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "


We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.


Sorry but that's a grossly misattributed quote.

Result of five minutes of Googling by dumbass kitty:

And if anyone knows a thing or two about proper quote attribution, it's Shapiro, the editor of the Yale Book of Quotations.
 
2013-09-17 02:32:44 PM  
img.fark.net


www.teaparty.org

YEAH!   WE KNOW !  AAAAAAAAAHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
2013-09-17 02:34:44 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: You shut your whore mouth.


You have no right to call me a whore. How would you know what a whore is? I don't see you paying for a woman to have dinner with you, you certainly wouldnt pay a woman to fark you.

Also, telling someone to "shut their whore mouth" on FARK is somewhat of a term of endearment. A kind of "I disagree with you, but it's all good."

I feel no camaraderie with you. I do not like you. I think you have a basic understanding of economic concepts, and think it entitles you to pass sweeping judgements. You also think your experiences should apply to everyone else regardless of their circumstances, and that how you see things is the same way everyone else sees them. This behavior is pretty typical of a 16-18 yr old teenager. Most people grow out of that, you clearly did not.

Disagree with me all you want, call me names if you will. I don't mind, you aint got nothin on me, Mr. Paul. But do not address me with anything approximating a term of endearment, you cocksucker.
 
2013-09-17 02:35:22 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Rich people don't employ poor people!

[beechwoodperiodsix.edublogs.org image 257x196]

They employ them at wages so low that their company has policies to assist their employees with getting welfare. It's almost like you're retarded.


What do you mean, "almost"?  They are willfully ignorant, or completely farking retarded.  There's no middle ground.  They will hold the Walton's up as a successfully boot-strappy, feel-good story, and ignore the fact that they're costing the rest of us billions in tax money to subsidize their workforce.
 
2013-09-17 02:36:18 PM  

Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "

We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.

Sorry but that's a grossly misattributed quote.

Result of five minutes of Googling by dumbass kitty:

And if anyone knows a thing or two about proper quote attribution, it's Shapiro, the editor of the Yale Book of Quotations.


Do you think I brought up the quote because Ben Franklin was the one it was attributed to?  It could have been your creepy uncle who came up with the quote and I would have still used it.
 
2013-09-17 02:37:28 PM  

CrazyCracka420: Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "

We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.

Sorry but that's a grossly misattributed quote.

Result of five minutes of Googling by dumbass kitty:

And if anyone knows a thing or two about proper quote attribution, it's Shapiro, the editor of the Yale Book of Quotations.


Do you think I brought up the quote because Ben Franklin was the one it was attributed to?  It could have been your creepy uncle who came up with the quote and I would have still used it.


*pees in your soup*

My uncle was in the Navy.
 
2013-09-17 02:43:29 PM  

CrazyCracka420: Infernalist: HotWingConspiracy: Infernalist: OnlyM3: HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig
Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.

So, you think that the bad economy of the late 80s is because of Bush sr.?   lol  oh god, it burns.

Hyper conservatism can never be wrong.

What we need is 20 straight years of Democratic control of the WH and congress.  No more of this '8 years and hand off' bullshiat.  We need a solid decade of Democratic control of the government so that we can 'see' what can come of it.  And then let the American people decide if the GOP alternatives are better or not.

Because right now, it's stupid.  We let the GOP fark things up with foreign wars and obscene tax cuts and cronyism and all but open bribery in the government at the highest level...and when shiat goes south, they throw up a lamb to be slaughtered after 8 years and the Democrats take over.

Democrats spend 8 years fixing the GOP fark ups and disasters and get us out of the wars and the whole time, the GOP is snarking and complaining about how the Democrats aren't fixing things fast enough.  And at the end of the 8 years, they talk about integrity of the office and how corrupt the Democrats are and weak on crime and our enemies are laughing at us...etc etc etc...

And we vote them back in and they go right back to provoking foreign wars and looting the government for as much as they can, and we continually have the unmitigated gall to act SURPRISED.

fark that.  2016 needs to be the point where we give the Democrats another 8 years in the WH.

Oh how cute, you think Democrats and Republicans are really any different than each other.

[s22.postimg.org image 401x400]

/liberal
//the Over ...


A liberal did this, so I feel ok about posting it:

www.bitlogic.com
If there's one place where the differences manifest themselves, it's in the Supreme Court, where one or two more conservatives would have killed Obamacare and Kelo and upheld DOMA while one or two more liberals would have killed Citizens United and Heller and upheld the VRA provisions.

No difference between the parties?
 
2013-09-17 02:44:11 PM  

Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?


If "hard work" was all it took to become wealthy, why aren't the Mexicans I see sweating their balls off cleaning up after and doing for white people (lawns, houses, food, children) all on their third mansion by now?
Horatio Alger is a myth, a lie and a sham perpetuated by the haves to give the have-nots that are stupid enough to believe a reason to get up in the morning, and to keep them in perpetual bondage.

Joe Blowme: election of Obama?


Considering he didn't actually BECOME president for another two and a half months after the election, I'm going to give this one the thread "F*cking Failure" award.
Wear your medal of shame proudly, doofus.
 
2013-09-17 02:44:43 PM  

Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "

We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.

Sorry but that's a grossly misattributed quote.

Result of five minutes of Googling by dumbass kitty:

And if anyone knows a thing or two about proper quote attribution, it's Shapiro, the editor of the Yale Book of Quotations.

Do you think I brought up the quote because Ben Franklin was the one it was attributed to?  It could have been your creepy uncle who came up with the quote and I would have still used it.

*pees in your soup*

My uncle was in the Navy.


Was that back when rum, sodomy, and the lash were still in fashion?
 
2013-09-17 02:45:37 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "

We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.

Sorry but that's a grossly misattributed quote.

Result of five minutes of Googling by dumbass kitty:

And if anyone knows a thing or two about proper quote attribution, it's Shapiro, the editor of the Yale Book of Quotations.

Do you think I brought up the quote because Ben Franklin was the one it was attributed to?  It could have been your creepy uncle who came up with the quote and I would have still used it.

*pees in your soup*

My uncle was in the Navy.

Was that back when rum, sodomy, and the lash were still in fashion?


The Pogues will never go out of fashion. ;)
 
2013-09-17 02:48:01 PM  

CrazyCracka420: What do you mean, "almost"?  They are willfully ignorant, or completely farking retarded.  There's no middle ground.  They will hold the Walton's up as a successfully boot-strappy, feel-good story, and ignore the fact that they're costing the rest of us billions in tax money to subsidize their workforce.


Oh look, another farker who can't "read good".
 
2013-09-17 02:50:32 PM  

Ricardo Klement: No difference between the parties?


The difference between any two given methods are self evident in the results.  So far, both of these allegedly different ideologies have gotten us, precisely, here and the same people are holding the same disparately huge amount of actual wealth in the same accounts.  It's nice to preach ideology and hold up the ostensibly august body that is a pack of appointed bishops who are in place to ponder the long and mind implications of laws that serve very few of the 99% in any useful way, but they're still just pieces on the board.  Not the players.
 
2013-09-17 02:59:25 PM  

max_pooper: OnlyM3: baufan2005
2013-09-17 08:13:00 AM

A slogan to placate the dumbmasses, because actions are harrrrrd.
Under President George W. Bush (Jan. 2007), black unemployment was 7.9%{1}.
Under Obama it has risen to 13.4% (Oct. 2012).

Too bad Facts are bannable offenses on fark.

What was it in Decmember 2008?


The unemployment rate for blacks in december 2008, the last full month GW Bush was in office, was 13.4 percent.
As of August 2013 it is 12.6%, the lowest in five years... since 2008.

What can we surmise about this?
1. The unemployment rate didn't "rise" to 13.4% under president Obama, it was there when he started his first term.
2. That rate has decreased under his presidency.
3. OnlyM3 is a liar and full of sh*t.
 
2013-09-17 03:00:07 PM  

bunner: Ricardo Klement: No difference between the parties?

The difference between any two given methods are self evident in the results.  So far, both of these allegedly different ideologies have gotten us, precisely, here and the same people are holding the same disparately huge amount of actual wealth in the same accounts.  It's nice to preach ideology and hold up the ostensibly august body that is a pack of appointed bishops who are in place to ponder the long and mind implications of laws that serve very few of the 99% in any useful way, but they're still just pieces on the board.  Not the players.


There are two other factors to consider: to a large degree, the two parties do a lot to undo each others' work. But, more importantly, when confronted by the same sets of problems, when disparate people agree on the course of action, it's usually because that course of action is the right one.

You know that Republicans and Democrats both agree that if you get tooth pain, you should see a dentist? And if you have a cavity, you should get it filled? To then declare the two parties are the same presupposes there was another option that was just as reasonable.

This last bit is what third parties want you to believe. The truth is that, for the most part, many of the solutions that are the same between the parties are the same because the combination of incentives and the set of available solutions end up with the same application. This isn't some mysterious "owned by the same people" nonsense, it's because that's how it is.

That there's two parties rather than 20 is irrelevant. You'd end up with the same things anyway. If you notice, parliamentary systems end up in two sides once the elections are all over: the government coalition, and the opposition. The difference is purely where that negotiation takes place. In the US, it's before the election. In England, it's after. And if anything makes the parties less reflective of the electorate, it's because of people who have too much ego to be part of that negotiation and want to go out and create their own parties.

This third-party battle has been going on for well over 100 years. Maybe people should try something different and join one of the two parties and try to influence their primaries. The Tea Party did it in VA - that's why Cuccinelli is the gubernatorial candidate and yet the least conservative candidate on the Republican ticket.
 
2013-09-17 03:00:55 PM  
Money is government.  Governance is saying who get to do what to whom, when, why, who gets to take what from whom, who can keep what and how much of it and for how long.  Oddly, the collective decisions about such weighty matters that have been handed down from the people who have, by whatever means, acquired the power to make them have been - "that would be us, to anybody we want, whenever, because we said so, we do, from anybody we want, all of it and as long as we like."  Oddly.
 
2013-09-17 03:03:21 PM  

Madbassist1: Nutsac_Jim: You shut your whore mouth.

You have no right to call me a whore. How would you know what a whore is? I don't see you paying for a woman to have dinner with you, you certainly wouldnt pay a woman to fark you.

Also, telling someone to "shut their whore mouth" on FARK is somewhat of a term of endearment. A kind of "I disagree with you, but it's all good."

I feel no camaraderie with you. I do not like you. I think you have a basic understanding of economic concepts, and think it entitles you to pass sweeping judgements. You also think your experiences should apply to everyone else regardless of their circumstances, and that how you see things is the same way everyone else sees them. This behavior is pretty typical of a 16-18 yr old teenager. Most people grow out of that, you clearly did not.

Disagree with me all you want, call me names if you will. I don't mind, you aint got nothin on me, Mr. Paul. But do not address me with anything approximating a term of endearment, you cocksucker.


Dont mince words tell us how you really feel
 
2013-09-17 03:03:46 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Kittypie070: CrazyCracka420: Ben Franklin:

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.  "
We've been there for a long time, only you and I weren't part of the club that took over control.

Sorry but that's a grossly misattributed quote.

Result of five minutes of Googling by dumbass kitty:

And if anyone knows a thing or two about proper quote attribution, it's Shapiro, the editor of the Yale Book of Quotations.


Do you think I brought up the quote because Ben Franklin was the one it was attributed to?  It could have been your creepy uncle who came up with the quote and I would have still used it.

*pees in your soup*

My uncle was in the Navy.


Was that back when rum, sodomy, and the lash were still in fashion?


Probably.

/now, back to the regularly scheduled mega-rich stompathon.
 
2013-09-17 03:06:33 PM  

Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread


Hey, Mr. Galt... old son, 'ow much water per day do you think you carry for your betters?  I bet it's enough to float a duck at least!
 
2013-09-17 03:09:22 PM  

Madbassist1: Nutsac_Jim: If your grandpa is 75 and is going to lose his house because of real estate taxes, then
it is time for the grandkids to pass on the new ipad this year and stick it out with last years ipad3 for another 6 months and pay granddaddies tax bill.

You arent near as smart as you think you are. Your libertarian ideology will keep you sleeping on that rocky patch of ground you formerly claimed held a house you paid for with cash.


I never claimed I had a house on it.  You assumed it.
I simply claimed that I saved up and paid cash for shiat, so that the evil bank man cant take it from me.

I mean, really, I have been all over this thread posting the benfits of renting and that most of the problem in housing was people getting too much into debt so that when times are tough, they cant pay it and lose it.

But go right ahead and think I was telling everyone "Im 18 and paid cash for my house and yacht, and you can too if you buy my books".
 
2013-09-17 03:09:45 PM  

Thunderpipes: stir22: revolutions don't start until the masses can't feed their families.  that's why the mega-rich and political parties make sure that the masses have just enough to live on.   dip below that, and it's game on.  they won't let that happen.

Who is "they? You do realize, almost all the liberal leaders pushing policy, are mega rich, right?


I realize that, that's why I don't have delusions that dems and repubs are much different.  They're pretty much all corporate whores. But I've said that specifically to you at least a dozen times over the years, and you still have your head in the sand and want to blame libs for everything (when in reality, there are no libs in government).

BraveNewCheneyWorld: CrazyCracka420: What do you mean, "almost"?  They are willfully ignorant, or completely farking retarded.  There's no middle ground.  They will hold the Walton's up as a successfully boot-strappy, feel-good story, and ignore the fact that they're costing the rest of us billions in tax money to subsidize their workforce.

Oh look, another farker who can't "read good".


You said nothing of substance...what are you trying to even say here:  Rich people don't employ poor people!

I couldn't figure it out, I know you're a troll and are not actually conservative.  That doesn't mean others don't hold your "viewpoints".
 
2013-09-17 03:10:07 PM  

Ricardo Klement: To then declare the two parties are the same presupposes there was another option that was just as reasonable.


No, that's a very stretched analogy that doesn't hold water.  And it overlooks that fact that by and large, neither party cares about anybody's "toothache" but the ones being suffered by the people who sign their checks.

Ricardo Klement: That there's two parties rather than 20 is irrelevant.


The fact that there are only two "viable" parties and that anybody who tries to add another is shouted down with "YOU'RE IRRELEVANT!" is vastly relevant

Ricardo Klement: And if anything makes the parties less reflective of the electorate, it's because of people who have too much ego to be part of that negotiation and want to go out and create their own parties.


Um, no.  That's an amazing bit of projecting that makes assumptions that are so doggedly jingoistic and superglued to very rose colored notions that I an't even begin to address the absolute naivety that is displayed in even vaguely subscribing to them.

Ricardo Klement: Maybe people should try something different and join one of the two parties and try to influence their primaries.


Which will lead to elections which will lead to switching the pawn on the board which leads us, so far, precisely here.  Only in your rainbow farting unicorn model, there is one glaring impediment to this accomplishing anything other than locking down the suckers to either chocolate or vanilla.  Nothing changes.  At all.
 
2013-09-17 03:12:48 PM  
[tosses CrazyCracka420 a cold beer fresh from the cooler]
 
2013-09-17 03:13:02 PM  

Ricardo Klement: CrazyCracka420: Infernalist: HotWingConspiracy: Infernalist: OnlyM3: HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig
Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.

So, you think that the bad economy of the late 80s is because of Bush sr.?   lol  oh god, it burns.

Hyper conservatism can never be wrong.

What we need is 20 straight years of Democratic control of the WH and congress.  No more of this '8 years and hand off' bullshiat.  We need a solid decade of Democratic control of the government so that we can 'see' what can come of it.  And then let the American people decide if the GOP alternatives are better or not.

Because right now, it's stupid.  We let the GOP fark things up with foreign wars and obscene tax cuts and cronyism and all but open bribery in the government at the highest level...and when shiat goes south, they throw up a lamb to be slaughtered after 8 years and the Democrats take over.

Democrats spend 8 years fixing the GOP fark ups and disasters and get us out of the wars and the whole time, the GOP is snarking and complaining about how the Democrats aren't fixing things fast enough.  And at the end of the 8 years, they talk about integrity of the office and how corrupt the Democrats are and weak on crime and our enemies are laughing at us...etc etc etc...

And we vote them back in and they go right back to provoking foreign wars and looting the government for as much as they can, and we continually have the unmitigated gall to act SURPRISED.

fark that.  2016 needs to be the point where we give the Democrats another 8 years in the WH.

Oh how cute, you think Democrats and Republicans are really any different than each other.

[s22.postimg.org image 401x400]

/li ...


The difference is so miniscule between the parties that the effect of me arguing with my Republican neighbor (analogy) is way more detrimental.  The Democrat and Republicans are typically rich and favor corporations over civilian interests.  We argue amongst ourselves while the politicians continue to consolidate power into fewer and fewer hands. 

But hey, we can potentially have "more liberal" (lol) justices in the Supreme Court if we keep playing in the current political dichotomy we have in this country. 

fark that noise, we need complete revamping of the system.  Our electoral process is problematic, and our system of how tax money is distributed is problematic.  Until these are addressed, what you or I say will not make a dent in the powerful, continuing to expand their powers.
 
2013-09-17 03:14:09 PM  

Kittypie070: [tosses CrazyCracka420 a cold beer fresh from the cooler]


Thanks it's been a long day already...exactly what I needed.

beeradvocate.com
 
2013-09-17 03:17:00 PM  

CrazyCracka420: fark that noise, we need complete revamping of the system. Our electoral process is problematic, and our system of how tax money is distributed is problematic. Until these are addressed, what you or I say will not make a dent in the powerful, continuing to expand their powers.


agree.  but, short of an all-out revolution i don't see it happening.
 
2013-09-17 03:22:15 PM  

rewind2846: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

If "hard work" was all it took to become wealthy, why aren't the Mexicans I see sweating their balls off cleaning up after and doing for white people (lawns, houses, food, children) all on their third mansion by now?
Horatio Alger is a myth, a lie and a sham perpetuated by the haves to give the have-nots that are stupid enough to believe a reason to get up in the morning, and to keep them in perpetual bondage.

Joe Blowme: election of Obama?

Considering he didn't actually BECOME president for another two and a half months after the election, I'm going to give this one the thread "F*cking Failure" award.
Wear your medal of shame proudly, doofus.


So he wasn't elected in 2008? I voted in a fake election? Damn, they went through a lot of work and cash to make it seem real.
 
2013-09-17 03:24:52 PM  

Two16: Joe Blowme: and yet another jealousy thread

Hey, Mr. Galt... old son, 'ow much water per day do you think you carry for your betters?  I bet it's enough to float a duck at least!


Only when we need to determine if someone is a witch or not
 
2013-09-17 03:27:28 PM  

CrazyCracka420: Kittypie070: [tosses CrazyCracka420 a cold beer fresh from the cooler]

Thanks it's been a long day already...exactly what I needed.

[beeradvocate.com image 150x300]


www.mensfitness.com

CHEERS!
3.bp.blogspot.com

Till tomorrow then?
 
2013-09-17 03:29:53 PM  

Madbassist1: Nutsac_Jim: You shut your whore mouth.

You have no right to call me a whore. How would you know what a whore is? I don't see you paying for a woman to have dinner with you, you certainly wouldnt pay a woman to fark you.

Also, telling someone to "shut their whore mouth" on FARK is somewhat of a term of endearment. A kind of "I disagree with you, but it's all good."

I feel no camaraderie with you. I do not like you. I think you have a basic understanding of economic concepts, and think it entitles you to pass sweeping judgements. You also think your experiences should apply to everyone else regardless of their circumstances, and that how you see things is the same way everyone else sees them. This behavior is pretty typical of a 16-18 yr old teenager. Most people grow out of that, you clearly did not.

Disagree with me all you want, call me names if you will. I don't mind, you aint got nothin on me, Mr. Paul. But do not address me with anything approximating a term of endearment, you cocksucker.


You are right.   I make wild assertions and think that because 2 + 2 = 4 in my little world, that it applies to other worlds too.

It isn't magic.
It isn't "Well I got by without insurance in my 20's so everyone else  can too.    It was if you pay cash for shiat, the banker cant take it from you.
It applies to all worlds.

If people want to lease a car and get a mortgage so they can 'have their cake sooner' then more power to them.  They are gambling.
No amount of crying about evil bankers changes that.

Now shut your whore mouth for making an assumption that I paid cash for residence and then calling me a liar about it.
 
2013-09-17 03:32:59 PM  

Madbassist1: DrPainMD: Dinki: DrPainMD: A poor person isn't poorer because someone else is rich.

Actually, yes they are. If the rich guy gets his money by paying the poor guy a minimal amount when he could just as easily pay the poor guy more.

Wages are determined by supply and demand. Start a business yourself and see. Pay your burger-flippers $30 per hour with full benefits and see how quickly you go bankrupt. There's a reason why VPs make more than janitors, and it's not because the owner likes the VPs more than he does the janitors.

The janitor does more work, and I think that is a large part of the farking issue.


Because keeping garbage cans empty and bathrooms clean equates to more work than keeping a business running and thousands of people employed?
 
2013-09-17 03:40:19 PM  

Madbassist1: I do not like you. I think you have a basic understanding of economic concepts, and think it entitles you to pass sweeping judgements. You also think your experiences should apply to everyone else regardless of their circumstances, and that how you see things is the same way everyone else sees them.


This is entirely untrue.

I certainly recognize that other people see things differently than me.  Quite simply, they are wrong.

But maybe you are right.  Maybe it IS best to have an albatross of a mortgage when companies are cutting hours back to 29 hours a week in order to avoid new PPACA costs.
costs.
 
2013-09-17 03:41:03 PM  

rewind2846: Jorn the Younger: DrPainMD: Is this the thread where everybody biatches about other people's money when they should be out earning money for themselves?

Is this the thread where conservatrolls show up to berate the poor for not having the good sense to be born wealthy, or attempt to maintain the fallacy that harder work turns into increased rewards?

If "hard work" was all it took to become wealthy, why aren't the Mexicans I see sweating their balls off cleaning up after and doing for white people (lawns, houses, food, children) all on their third mansion by now?


I bet they do a lot better than the Mexican's who don't bust their ass working all day...

Working harder is a factor, and you really have to be pretty ignorant (or work for the government) to believe that hard work as a general rule doesn't result in increased rewards. Coming in late every day, calling in sick every other week and taking 2 hour lunches isn't a receipt for advancement in any company unless your dad own's it.

That said, it is only one factor to success. I could spend three days a week cutting my lawn with scissors. What you do or don't do is equally as important as how hard you work at it. You can be the best janitor in a company. That might get you some extra shifts, a better raise and some over time that puts you ahead of the worst janitor, but your aren't going to become CEO of the company. Also doesn't mean you weren't rewarded for working harder either...
 
2013-09-17 03:41:22 PM  

Neighborhood Watch: Jorn the Younger:  Don't forget about the tripling of worker efficiency thanks to technology, so one person now does the work of three, for less pay.


But-b-b-but liberals love science!

It's the ignorant, conservative businessmen who are opposed to it.



Liberals are interested in science because it can be used to increase knowledge and help people.
Corporations are interested in science because it can be used to increase profits and help executives and shareholders.


One of these things is not like the other.
 
2013-09-17 03:44:52 PM  

EWreckedSean: Because keeping garbage cans empty and bathrooms clean equates to more work than keeping a business running and thousands of people employed?


We have had a notion in this country since it's inception, a throwback to our English class system heritage, that people who work with  their hands are yobs, inconsequential, failures and not as "good" as the people with clean fingernails and their mortgage in their pocket.  And they sure as sh*t milked it, those well scrubbed and suited cocksuckers.  And we let them.  I got an idea.  Everybody go on e-bay or to a goodwill and buy a suit or a dress that fits.  Wear them.  Every day.  Watch the FOX news crowd blame it on some communiss conspiracy.  *snort*
 
2013-09-17 03:49:16 PM  

Joe Blowme: So he wasn't elected in 2008? I voted in a fake election? Damn, they went through a lot of work and cash to make it seem real.


Maybe you should brush up on how this whole "president" thing works. See, they're "elected" or chosen in the first week of November of an election year, but they don't actually take office (as in "become president") until the third week of January of the following year. It's like trying to blame you for an apartment fire in the complex you've signed the lease for but won't move into for another month.

Of course that little tidbit of info has never stopped the FW:FW:FW: group from blaming the current president for all the bad sh*t that went on well before January 20th, 2009. These morons have to break a sweat to remember what month it is.
 
2013-09-17 03:55:45 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: I certainly recognize that other people see things differently than me. Quite simply, they are wrong.


you had some great points in this thread...i agreed with you about the rent.

but it's statements like i quoted where you lose legitimacy.  and that's a shame.
 
2013-09-17 04:03:19 PM  

Infernalist: HotWingConspiracy: Infernalist: OnlyM3: HighlanderRPI
2013-09-17 07:56:21 AM


/Oblig
Reagan has been out of office for how many years now? Bush disagreed with his economic beliefs calling them "Voodoo economics" and changed the course.... leading to the bush recession. Remember "It's the economy stupid"?

So, how long has zero been in office? You're blaming Reagan who's been dead longer than zero has been at the helm.

So, you think that the bad economy of the late 80s is because of Bush sr.?   lol  oh god, it burns.

Hyper conservatism can never be wrong.

What we need is 20 straight years of Democratic control of the WH and congress.  No more of this '8 years and hand off' bullshiat.  We need a solid decade of Democratic control of the government so that we can 'see' what can come of it.  And then let the American people decide if the GOP alternatives are better or not.

Because right now, it's stupid.  We let the GOP fark things up with foreign wars and obscene tax cuts and cronyism and all but open bribery in the government at the highest level...and when shiat goes south, they throw up a lamb to be slaughtered after 8 years and the Democrats take over.

Democrats spend 8 years fixing the GOP fark ups and disasters and get us out of the wars and the whole time, the GOP is snarking and complaining about how the Democrats aren't fixing things fast enough.  And at the end of the 8 years, they talk about integrity of the office and how corrupt the Democrats are and weak on crime and our enemies are laughing at us...etc etc etc...

And we vote them back in and they go right back to provoking foreign wars and looting the government for as much as they can, and we continually have the unmitigated gall to act SURPRISED.

fark that.  2016 needs to be the point where we give the Democrats another 8 years in the WH.


When it still doesn't work what will your excuse be? You obviously haven't noticed that democrats are just as corrupt as republicans. They own stock in the same companies, vacation at the same resorts, and get gifts from the same lobbyists. They're more than willing to start wars, blame the other party for their own failures, and take credit for the other's accomplishments.

The only thing we need in DC is a guillotine in front of the Capitol Building. Don't stop until they're all dead, then do the same thing to their replacements. After half a dozen times they'll get the message.
 
2013-09-17 04:10:56 PM  

rewind2846: blaming the current president for all the bad sh*t that went on well before January 20th, 2009


lol are you kidding me.  Obama has so many farkups on his record there's no need to dig that far.

Or are you of the "obama is my blameless messiah" camp?  In which case I lol even harder.
 
2013-09-17 04:11:08 PM  
Two hundred and thirty seven years ago, + / -, a new nation was formed in a distant colony by overthrowing fat, imperialistic, greedy tyranny.

And there was much rejoicing.

Two hundred and twenty four years ago, an old nation gathered to end oppressive, greedy elitist rule with a bloodbath.

Check your watch, people.  History is cyclical and that Little Debbie's in the cabinet next to the Ramen is what you get instead of bread.I am not advocating or decrying the inevitability of revolution 2.0.  I'm just watching the filmstrip loop to START.
 
2013-09-17 04:13:59 PM  

Shadow Blasko: I wish I could simply post this as a reply to at least 100 people in this thread, but I am going to post it here.


I read your post and agree with the content.
 
2013-09-17 04:17:30 PM  

bunner: EWreckedSean: Because keeping garbage cans empty and bathrooms clean equates to more work than keeping a business running and thousands of people employed?

We have had a notion in this country since it's inception, a throwback to our English class system heritage, that people who work with  their hands are yobs, inconsequential, failures and not as "good" as the people with clean fingernails and their mortgage in their pocket.  And they sure as sh*t milked it, those well scrubbed and suited cocksuckers.  And we let them.  I got an idea.  Everybody go on e-bay or to a goodwill and buy a suit or a dress that fits.  Wear them.  Every day.  Watch the FOX news crowd blame it on some communiss conspiracy.  *snort*


It is not a question of being "as good", it is a question of value produced by their labors. A company VP produces a lot more value than a company janitor as a general rule. The truth is most people can successfully empty a garbage can or scrub a toilet, most can't run a successful company. It doesn't matter how shiny those toilets get, it's not going to produce enough value to afford you the salary to have three mansions.
 
2013-09-17 04:18:52 PM  

bunner: Two hundred and thirty seven years ago, + / -, a new nation was formed in a distant colony by overthrowing fat, imperialistic, greedy tyranny.

And there was much rejoicing.

Two hundred and twenty four years ago, an old nation gathered to end oppressive, greedy elitist rule with a bloodbath.

Check your watch, people.  History is cyclical and that Little Debbie's in the cabinet next to the Ramen is what you get instead of bread.I am not advocating or decrying the inevitability of revolution 2.0.  I'm just watching the filmstrip loop to START.


Overthrown by fat, imperialistic, greedy tyrants closer to home? Let's be honest, this country was created to protect the rights of local, wealthy white land owners.
 
2013-09-17 04:20:57 PM  

rewind2846: Joe Blowme: So he wasn't elected in 2008? I voted in a fake election? Damn, they went through a lot of work and cash to make it seem real.

Maybe you should brush up on how this whole "president" thing works. See, they're "elected" or chosen in the first week of November of an election year, but they don't actually take office (as in "become president") until the third week of January of the following year. It's like trying to blame you for an apartment fire in the complex you've signed the lease for but won't move into for another month.

Of course that little tidbit of info has never stopped the FW:FW:FW: group from blaming the current president for all the bad sh*t that went on well before January 20th, 2009. These morons have to break a sweat to remember what month it is.


In fairness it hasn't stopped the FW:FW:FW: Obama crowd of blaming everything that happened after  January 20th, 2009 on the president who left office then either.
 
2013-09-17 04:23:36 PM  

rewind2846: Joe Blowme: So he wasn't elected in 2008? I voted in a fake election? Damn, they went through a lot of work and cash to make it seem real.

Maybe you should brush up on how this whole "president" thing works. See, they're "elected" or chosen in the first week of November of an election year, but they don't actually take office (as in "become president") until the third week of January of the following year. It's like trying to blame you for an apartment fire in the complex you've signed the lease for but won't move into for another month.

Of course that little tidbit of info has never stopped the FW:FW:FW: group from blaming the current president for all the bad sh*t that went on well before January 20th, 2009. These morons have to break a sweat to remember what month it is.


Thats nice an all that but i only said he was elected in fall of 2008, is that wrong or right?
 
2013-09-17 04:29:15 PM  

wolfpaq777: rewind2846: blaming the current president for all the bad sh*t that went on well before January 20th, 2009

lol are you kidding me.  Obama has so many farkups on his record there's no need to dig that far.

Or are you of the "obama is my blameless messiah" camp?  In which case I lol even harder.


"Lol" all you like. Break a brain cell if you want. I'm not stupid enough to blame the man for anything that happened before January 20th, 2009, or for policies instituted by the previous administration that, unfortunately, are like sh*t in a deep pile carpet. The smell is going to be there for awhile no matter how much it is scrubbed.
The person I was answering was under the mistaken impression that when a president is elected he instantly is responsible for all that happens in office before he actually becomes president... a difference that should have been learned in 2nd grade civics. Anything that happened after the 20th over which he had control is on him.

BTW, the only people who use the word "messiah" when referring to the current president are usually moron republicans, mental defectives, and people with the common sense and intellectual capacity of small rodents. Where do you fit in?

/I may have to apologize to the mental defectives
//it's not usually their fault
 
2013-09-17 04:34:29 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Kittypie070: Nutsac_Jim: Kittypie070: Nutsac_Jim: If your local economy tanks, how much is it to get rent somewhere else? $0.

Wow.

Really? How?

I'd sure like to pay $0 rent.

I didnt say rent was free.   It costs you $0 to choose to get a different landlord.

vs the cost of selling a house in order to buy a house elsewhere, you know.. so you do not 'throw rent down the drain'.

It does?

So yay, I never ever need to pay a security deposit ever again, huh?

And it doesn't cost even a nickel to rent a truck to move my stuff?

Do you get your security deposit back when you leave?    You do?   But But But.

Let me know of the magic moving company that moves all your shiat for free, simply because you had a mortgage.


I am fairly sure you wouldn't get your security deposit back if you have to break your lease at the drop of a hat so you can move to where all the jobs are.
 
2013-09-17 04:39:04 PM  

EWreckedSean: Let's be honest, this country was created to protect the rights of local, wealthy white land owners.


Well, yeah.  But when it was created, that's pretty much all there were.  Europe and all.  And some rather uppity red people with funny customs.
 
2013-09-17 04:42:20 PM  

bunner: EWreckedSean: Let's be honest, this country was created to protect the rights of local, wealthy white land owners.

Well, yeah.  But when it was created, that's pretty much all there were.  Europe and all.  And some rather uppity red people with funny customs.


Actually most people were poor and not land owners. And I left out men.
 
2013-09-17 04:43:45 PM  

EWreckedSean: bunner: EWreckedSean: Let's be honest, this country was created to protect the rights of local, wealthy white land owners.

Well, yeah.  But when it was created, that's pretty much all there were.  Europe and all.  And some rather uppity red people with funny customs.

Actually most people were poor and not land owners. And I left out men.


And Protestant in most places. Catholics and Jews certainly weren't given voting rights.
 
2013-09-17 04:44:31 PM  

EWreckedSean: The truth is most people can successfully empty a garbage can or scrub a toilet, most can't run a successful company. It doesn't matter how shiny those toilets get, it's not going to produce enough value to afford you the salary to have three mansions


True.  But, if the VP manages to produce "value" by fistf*cking the entire janitorial staff over the sink by slashing their wages and firing half of them, he still gets the mansion.  And no value was created.  They just picked the pockets of the serfs.  Picking the pockets of the serfs is a source of a lot of the "value" that's created, it seems.  If it was really all just a matter of who created the most value by honest means, we wouldn't be having this discussion and this article wouldn't have been published.
 
2013-09-17 04:45:30 PM  

EWreckedSean: Actually most people were poor and not land owners. And I left out men.


When they got here, no.  Fences and pieces of paper.  The white man's civilization template.
 
2013-09-17 04:46:16 PM  

Shadow Blasko: I wish I could simply post this as a reply to at least 100 people in this thread, but I am going to post it here. ....GE isn't gonna fix it. They ...


Clearly, your family isn't bootstrappy enough.

But seriously, the post-WW2 economy in the U.S. (up until about the mid-1970s) was a fluke. The rest of the world was in a shambles because of the war and the biggest countries (China, USSR and India) spent about 20 years farking around with stupid politics, hamstringing their economies to the extent that they were not serious competition for us (I hope somebody in the U.S. government had enough of a sense of humor to send the Soviets and the leaders in China and India a thank you note for that). Manufacturing (that hadn't yet moved overseas) needed lots of warm bodies, so labor here had bargaining power. And all those Boomers were buying houses and cars and appliances and college educations, so there was a large part of the market for all the stuff we were building and manufacturing, leading to biatchin' pay and benefits for people who didn't have college degrees.

All that's changed. And I doubt it's going to change back. The corporations only granted labor the benefits they did because they felt they had to. They never felt loyalty. Not to workers, anyway. And now the Boomers, who were assets in the fat years, are old, sick liabilities.
 
2013-09-17 04:51:11 PM  

bunner: EWreckedSean: The truth is most people can successfully empty a garbage can or scrub a toilet, most can't run a successful company. It doesn't matter how shiny those toilets get, it's not going to produce enough value to afford you the salary to have three mansions

True.  But, if the VP manages to produce "value" by fistf*cking the entire janitorial staff over the sink by slashing their wages and firing half of them, he still gets the mansion.  And no value was created.  They just picked the pockets of the serfs.  Picking the pockets of the serfs is a source of a lot of the "value" that's created, it seems.  If it was really all just a matter of who created the most value by honest means, we wouldn't be having this discussion and this article wouldn't have been published.


General most companies don't have a VP whose job it is to keep the janitorial staff costs down. And honest is a loaded word. Managing employment costs is an important aspect to keeping a company in business, and those that fail to do it often don't last. Like it or not you have to treat people in business often like a corporate asset. They have costs, they have value, and that has to be measured against the bottom line. And sure there are some individuals in this country who get disgusting bonuses, but it is hardly the majority of people. Average VP packages in this country range around $150,000 a year range or so, not $1,500,000. It's a decent living but hardly disgusting.
 
2013-09-17 04:56:38 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Shadow Blasko: I wish I could simply post this as a reply to at least 100 people in this thread, but I am going to post it here. ....GE isn't gonna fix it. They ...

Clearly, your family isn't bootstrappy enough.

But seriously, the post-WW2 economy in the U.S. (up until about the mid-1970s) was a fluke. The rest of the world was in a shambles because of the war and the biggest countries (China, USSR and India) spent about 20 years farking around with stupid politics, hamstringing their economies to the extent that they were not serious competition for us (I hope somebody in the U.S. government had enough of a sense of humor to send the Soviets and the leaders in China and India a thank you note for that). Manufacturing (that hadn't yet moved overseas) needed lots of warm bodies, so labor here had bargaining power. And all those Boomers were buying houses and cars and appliances and college educations, so there was a large part of the market for all the stuff we were building and manufacturing, leading to biatchin' pay and benefits for people who didn't have college degrees.

All that's changed. And I doubt it's going to change back. The corporations only granted labor the benefits they did because they felt they had to. They never felt loyalty. Not to workers, anyway. And now the Boomers, who were assets in the fat years, are old, sick liabilities.


I know it's not, but I just can't wrap my head around how it became legal for companies to say "Nope, we can't pay our pensions.. so we're not gonna" and just walk away from a contract, while continuing to be a MASSIVE company with massive assets and huge amounts of cash they can hide with creative book keeping.

If I did that, I would go to jail.

The banks that did it got MONEY for screwing up, and the people that run those banks.. they didn't lose everything... did they? Why not?

Because citizens can't afford the legal system that was supposed to protect US.
 
2013-09-17 05:04:18 PM  

EWreckedSean: General most companies don't have a VP whose job it is to keep the janitorial staff costs down.


Pick a staff.  Any staff.

And honest is a loaded word.

No.  It's not.  It's mud simple.

I get it.  You know, me no know.   You get it, me no get it.  Got it.

And as far as VPs only making 150k a year, well shouldn't they be getting bootstrappy?  I mean, so far, all I can gather is that you're either a VP of something or have a need to shill for VPs.  No idea why, but I got no pony in that race.
 
2013-09-17 05:07:55 PM  

Boudyro: Lady J: regardless of libs vs cons; whatever (all boring)

what's to be done? you can't march into people's houses and take wealth

Why not? The megawealthy are gaming the system and have no problem taking wealth. Nothing wrong with crashing the economy, forcing people out of work, then seizing people's homes when they can't pay the mortgage. All, I might add, while using their victims' tax dollars to insulate themselves from any losses or risk.

The only difference is they do it "legally" by buying the people who make the laws. The real tragedy is that we have the usual Fark shills in this thread who are being forced to bend over and squeal like a pig just like the rest of us. The difference is they like it and squeal for more.


really this. i cant believe how many of you morans defend this. if you are not the 1%, you are getting farked. there are no 1%ers commenting here i'm sure, so some of you are greasing up yourselves, and are enjoying getting farked over, willing, and defending it. sickos
 
2013-09-17 05:14:34 PM  

Shadow Blasko: Smelly Pirate Hooker: Shadow Blasko: I wish I could simply post this as a reply to at least 100 people in this thread, but I am going to post it here. ....GE isn't gonna fix it. They ...

Clearly, your family isn't bootstrappy enough.

But seriously, the post-WW2 economy in the U.S. (up until about the mid-1970s) was a fluke. The rest of the world was in a shambles because of the war and the biggest countries (China, USSR and India) spent about 20 years farking around with stupid politics, hamstringing their economies to the extent that they were not serious competition for us (I hope somebody in the U.S. government had enough of a sense of humor to send the Soviets and the leaders in China and India a thank you note for that). Manufacturing (that hadn't yet moved overseas) needed lots of warm bodies, so labor here had bargaining power. And all those Boomers were buying houses and cars and appliances and college educations, so there was a large part of the market for all the stuff we were building and manufacturing, leading to biatchin' pay and benefits for people who didn't have college degrees.

All that's changed. And I doubt it's going to change back. The corporations only granted labor the benefits they did because they felt they had to. They never felt loyalty. Not to workers, anyway. And now the Boomers, who were assets in the fat years, are old, sick liabilities.

I know it's not, but I just can't wrap my head around how it became legal for companies to say "Nope, we can't pay our pensions.. so we're not gonna" and just walk away from a contract, while continuing to be a MASSIVE company with massive assets and huge amounts of cash they can hide with creative book keeping.

If I did that, I would go to jail.

The banks that did it got MONEY for screwing up, and the people that run those banks.. they didn't lose everything... did they? Why not?

Because citizens can't afford the legal system that was supposed to protect US.


Because companies write the laws. Forget all that "How a bill becomes a law" bullshiat from Schoolhouse Rock. How a bill becomes a law looks more like a gang rape in a tiny room at the back of a saloon than what they let us see publicly.

Rich people have always been in charge here. I don't even care about that so much as long as the rest of us don't get screwed too much. But the financial bullshiat that's happened in recent history, coupled with the "the 47% are a bunch of lazy assholes who contribute nothing whatsoever to society" crap from a bunch of dickweeds who drive past the rest of us like we're the dumb animals in a safari - yeah, that shiat makes me mad. And I'm employed. And not in significant debt. And I have a college degree.

So I can't imagine how mad people who've really been screwed are.
 
2013-09-17 05:15:00 PM  
Print the money.  Make it the only access point to anything necessary to live.  Turn it into a pile of debt by using it to leverage wealth that it doesn't actually cover the cost of and then the people forced to use it carry your debt for you.  Privatize profits.  Rig the game so that those profits aren't taxed.  Does anybody here not actually get that, yet?  A bunch of cats got together and finally shoved a central bank that controls currency and it's inflation and deflation "value" up our butts and then used the IOUs to play supermarket sweep.  And now the shelves are bare.  The scam payed.  Grab a broom and sweep up their mess cause it's the only work left.
 
2013-09-17 05:18:58 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Madbassist1: Nutsac_Jim: You shut your whore mouth.

You have no right to call me a whore. How would you know what a whore is? I don't see you paying for a woman to have dinner with you, you certainly wouldnt pay a woman to fark you.

Also, telling someone to "shut their whore mouth" on FARK is somewhat of a term of endearment. A kind of "I disagree with you, but it's all good."

I feel no camaraderie with you. I do not like you. I think you have a basic understanding of economic concepts, and think it entitles you to pass sweeping judgements. You also think your experiences should apply to everyone else regardless of their circumstances, and that how you see things is the same way everyone else sees them. This behavior is pretty typical of a 16-18 yr old teenager. Most people grow out of that, you clearly did not.

Disagree with me all you want, call me names if you will. I don't mind, you aint got nothin on me, Mr. Paul. But do not address me with anything approximating a term of endearment, you cocksucker.

You are right.   I make wild assertions and think that because 2 + 2 = 4 in my little world, that it applies to other worlds too.

It isn't magic.
It isn't "Well I got by without insurance in my 20's so everyone else  can too.    It was if you pay cash for shiat, the banker cant take it from you.
It applies to all worlds.

If people want to lease a car and get a mortgage so they can 'have their cake sooner' then more power to them.  They are gambling.
No amount of crying about evil bankers changes that.

Now shut your whore mouth for making an assumption that I paid cash for residence and then calling me a liar about it.


In the midst of standing on your soapbox and proclaiming how perfect your plan is, and how well it's gone so far pray consider the possibility that not everyone will happen upon the same circumstances as you. Imagine that the times when opportunity went well for you go the other way for someone else. Stretch your mind for the concept of "there but for the grace of God go I" when someone tells you that the breaks *didn't* fall for them like they have for you. Imagine if you will how random chance handing another person a shiat sandwich may *not* be the result of being an idiot who can't manage the simple task of handling their money.

Nevermind. It was a silly request. I don't want you to strain something.

\MOAR BOOTSTRAPS
 
2013-09-17 05:19:16 PM  
We're not plotting to overthrow the royals.  We're waving at the ass end of their getaway car.  And unless we want to race the monkeys to the airport, I suggest we strap in.
 
2013-09-17 05:37:20 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Shadow Blasko: Smelly Pirate Hooker: Shadow Blasko: I wish I could simply post this as a reply to at least 100 people in this thread, but I am going to post it here. ....GE isn't gonna fix it. They ...

Clearly, your family isn't bootstrappy enough.

But seriously, the post-WW2 economy in the U.S. (up until about the mid-1970s) was a fluke. The rest of the world was in a shambles because of the war and the biggest countries (China, USSR and India) spent about 20 years farking around with stupid politics, hamstringing their economies to the extent that they were not serious competition for us (I hope somebody in the U.S. government had enough of a sense of humor to send the Soviets and the leaders in China and India a thank you note for that). Manufacturing (that hadn't yet moved overseas) needed lots of warm bodies, so labor here had bargaining power. And all those Boomers were buying houses and cars and appliances and college educations, so there was a large part of the market for all the stuff we were building and manufacturing, leading to biatchin' pay and benefits for people who didn't have college degrees.

All that's changed. And I doubt it's going to change back. The corporations only granted labor the benefits they did because they felt they had to. They never felt loyalty. Not to workers, anyway. And now the Boomers, who were assets in the fat years, are old, sick liabilities.

I know it's not, but I just can't wrap my head around how it became legal for companies to say "Nope, we can't pay our pensions.. so we're not gonna" and just walk away from a contract, while continuing to be a MASSIVE company with massive assets and huge amounts of cash they can hide with creative book keeping.

If I did that, I would go to jail.

The banks that did it got MONEY for screwing up, and the people that run those banks.. they didn't lose everything... did they? Why not?

Because citizens can't afford the legal system that was supposed to protect US.

Because companies wr ...


same here. we cant escape the trap with the rules they made to make it.
 
2013-09-17 05:40:53 PM  

some_beer_drinker: same here. we cant escape the trap with the rules they made to make it.


And that, folks, is point, set, match.
 
2013-09-17 05:51:09 PM  

rewind2846: BTW, the only people who use the word "messiah" when referring to the current president are usually moron republicans, mental defectives, and people with the common sense and intellectual capacity of small rodents. Where do you fit in?


rofl.

you are too cute.

/ try not to use words like "only", it makes it really easy to prove you wrong, although given how stupid your post was I'm guessing it's not that hard to do even when you aren't speaking in absolutes
 
2013-09-17 05:55:17 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Slaves2Darkness: Not unless we raise inflation to 5-8%. The problem right now is that firms and individuals are sitting on mountains, oceans, a veritable dragon's hoard of cash, because with inflation this low the opportunity cost of holding cash is less than the opportunity cost of spending it on capital or land.

No.

They're not stuffing that money into mattresses.


Yes they are, just look at Apples balance sheet what do they have on hand, it is projected to be 156 billion dollars.
 
2013-09-17 05:56:34 PM  

Headso: Carousel Beast: doublesecretprobation: Neighborhood Watch: I've never understood why liberals are so obsessed with other peoples' money (and/or private property, in general).

because we're not willfully ignorant of history?

Really? How well has forced wealth redistribution worked since the Great October Socialist Revolution?

99.6% of "poor" people own a refrigerator, so it's working pretty good.


I think their landlords would disagree who owns that frig.
 
2013-09-17 05:58:23 PM  

Headso: Ricardo Klement: Slaves2Darkness: Not unless we raise inflation to 5-8%. The problem right now is that firms and individuals are sitting on mountains, oceans, a veritable dragon's hoard of cash, because with inflation this low the opportunity cost of holding cash is less than the opportunity cost of spending it on capital or land.

No.

They're not stuffing that money into mattresses.

it's being invested out of the country in emerging markets, the middle class subsidizes their profits and they take those profits and invest them in developing markets and tax shelters.


No it is not.

The top  five as of 2012 were

Apple 156 billion cash on hand
Microsoft 51 billion cash on hand
Google 43 billion cash on hand
Pfizer  35.25 billion cash on hand.

They are not investing it that cash is sitting there doing nothing. Why else do you think vulture capitalist bought, looted, and pillaged Hostess?
 
2013-09-17 05:59:22 PM  

Slaves2Darkness: Ricardo Klement: Slaves2Darkness: Not unless we raise inflation to 5-8%. The problem right now is that firms and individuals are sitting on mountains, oceans, a veritable dragon's hoard of cash, because with inflation this low the opportunity cost of holding cash is less than the opportunity cost of spending it on capital or land.

No.

They're not stuffing that money into mattresses.

Yes they are, just look at Apples balance sheet what do they have on hand, it is projected to be 156 billion dollars.


And Apple is not stuffing that into a giant mattress somewhere. Aside from some petty cash, I'm betting they're putting it into some kind of financial institution.
 
2013-09-17 06:01:44 PM  
Having read only the first page, the usual suspects showed and once again accused liberals of simply being jealous of rich people. What you dolts understand is that it's not about personal envy (though I wouldn't mind driving a Porsche), but about how unhealthy society becomes once wealth disparity hits levels like this. Instead of seeing the big picture, the 1% white knighters use the opportunity to accuse the poor of having made bad life decisions, or the middle class for not working hard enough. Furthermore, that same 1% gains more control over the government year by year in order to maintain their status, which is too often at the expense of "regular" people.

If you can't understand why this concerns so many people, it's doubtful you understand anything about how a .0stable society works long-term.
 
2013-09-17 06:03:21 PM  
"Don't" understand
 
2013-09-17 06:04:04 PM  
Remember how we all secretly cheered for Gordon Gecko and smirked along with him as he laid out all those "hard truths" that make a winner a winner?

content7.flixster.com

Ah, ha ha.  Ever get the feeling you've been cheated.

Movies like that were the white man's gangster rap.

"He's just saying how it is in the hood and he lost in the end!"  Cause, yeah... real life is like the movies.
 
2013-09-17 06:05:07 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Aside from some petty cash, I'm betting they're putting it into some kind of financial institution.


Where it is no doubt safely sitting.
 
2013-09-17 06:10:08 PM  
Obscene profits are when you make enough off of your product or service and stock to make every man jack of your staff amazingly comfortable forever and shove the other ~n billions up your ass instead of putting the money back into play in the economy.  Which is sort of pathetic, because that's about all it's good for.  Moving around.  Actual mattress?  Sure isn't.  Same difference?  Sure is.
 
2013-09-17 06:20:11 PM  

stir22: Nutsac_Jim: stir22: Jobs that used to pay a living wage just dont anymore. I know and love people who make 8.50 an hour and are supposed to make ends meet on that. Food, shelter, gas insurance, etc. Couple that with t ...

EXACTLY.  you are much more eloquent than am i.   well-said.


If they chose to not stay in school and learn some knowledge, and also chose to not learn a marketable trade, then they deserve 8.50 an hour.

If you go out whoring at night and never use protection, then you deserve to get herpes.  That is the logical result of your action.

ummmm.......i know a WHOLE LOT of college grads delivering pizzas and doing other such jobs.......and no, not just ones with liberal arts degrees.


Pizza delivery used to be decent job to pay for college.  But then the price of fuel doubled (as did tuition), the restaurant compensation for your car expenses halved and after the last minimum wage increase, they figured out how to pay LESS because tipped employees don't qualify for full minimum wage in most states.

Yes, if they increase the minimum wage there will be less jobs.  One because they'll stop overstaffing just because labor is cheap.  Two, wannabe millionaire franchisees with gimmick restaurants dropped every 30 miles will have to rely on quality product to expand and make money rather than lean on the fact that labor only costs 15%.  Three, the employees getting a better minimum wage won't have to rely on as many hours at other jobs to get the basics.  Lastly, the people in jobs just outside minimum wage will stop getting ripped off on their labor too and see some increases as their wages are equivalent to minimum wage of the 70's.
 
2013-09-17 06:29:50 PM  

TiMthisIS: Yes, if they increase the minimum wage there will be less jobs.  One because they'll stop overstaffing just because labor is cheap.  Two, wannabe millionaire franchisees with gimmick restaurants dropped every 30 miles will have to rely on quality product to expand and make money rather than lean on the fact that labor only costs 15%.  Three, the employees getting a better minimum wage won't have to rely on as many hours at other jobs to get the basics.  Lastly, the people in jobs just outside minimum wage will stop getting ripped off on their labor too and see some increases as their wages are equivalent to minimum wage of the 70's.


Before I click the Smart button, I just want to get this out of the way.

"Obamuniss, soshliss, musslim, com'niss, hippy, lazy, anti merrkin, OWS, marxist sumb*tch, nahn wun wun!1!  Traiter!1!1!

There.

That should cover the Job Creator™ cheerleaders rant.
 
2013-09-17 06:49:01 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: So I can't imagine how mad people who've really been screwed are.


Don't worry, the new marijuana easing will fix all that.
 
2013-09-17 06:49:09 PM  

bunner: Ricardo Klement: Aside from some petty cash, I'm betting they're putting it into some kind of financial institution.

Where it is no doubt safely sitting being invested in other companies and loaned out to people to buy homes, cars, and start new businesses that employ people.

 
2013-09-17 07:14:32 PM  

leevis: Where it is no doubt safely sitting being invested in other companies and loaned out to people to buy homes, cars, and start new businesses that employ people that will eventually be acquired, closed and disposed of into the coffers of one of the subsidiaries that created them.

 
2013-09-17 07:27:32 PM  
This makes me so angry I could sit aimlessly in a park for a month or so then go home and forget about the whole thing.
 
2013-09-17 07:30:35 PM  
You're in luck.  There's lots of tear gas, tasers and riot batons left from 2012.
 
2013-09-17 07:44:49 PM  
In light of the huge amount of gravitas and credibility afforded to economics theories, for example; trickle down, I have come up with one of my own.  I call it the Bunne Rabb Greater Motherf*cker Theory of Economics.  "If you give anybody anything of any value whatsoever, they tend to keep it."  You can send the Nobel to my home address.
 
2013-09-17 08:46:52 PM  

bunner: Ricardo Klement: Aside from some petty cash, I'm betting they're putting it into some kind of financial institution.

Where it is no doubt safely sitting.


How very generous of the financial institution. Not only is it losing interest on the money to the tune of over $3b a year, but they're actually paying interest to Apple on top of that.

I didn't know banks were so willing to take that hit for us at no profit to themselves whatsoever.
 
2013-09-17 08:48:20 PM  

bunner: leevis: Where it is no doubt safely sitting being invested in other companies and loaned out to people to buy homes, cars, and start new businesses that employ people that will eventually be acquired, closed and disposed of into the coffers of one of the subsidiaries that created them.


Gee - that sounds a lot like economic activity to me. I guess it ain't just sitting there outside the economy after all!

/That SHOULD put that myth to rest, but people will believe what they want to believe.
 
2013-09-17 09:07:45 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Gee - that sounds a lot like economic activity to me.


It is.

So's this.

us.123rf.com

And this.

www.backpocketcoo.com

And this

wpblogger.com

Any of this sinking in yet?

Cause the banksters you're carrying water for aren't recording your IP so they can offer you that board member job any time soon.
 
2013-09-17 09:16:53 PM  

bunner: In light of the huge amount of gravitas and credibility afforded to economics theories, for example; trickle down, I have come up with one of my own.  I call it the Bunne Rabb Greater Motherf*cker Theory of Economics.  "If you give anybody anything of any value whatsoever, they tend to keep it."  You can send the Nobel to my home address.


I should cast an inaccurate replica outta plaster or sumpin and mail it to ya.
 
2013-09-17 09:21:44 PM  

Kittypie070: bunner: In light of the huge amount of gravitas and credibility afforded to economics theories, for example; trickle down, I have come up with one of my own.  I call it the Bunne Rabb Greater Motherf*cker Theory of Economics.  "If you give anybody anything of any value whatsoever, they tend to keep it."  You can send the Nobel to my home address.

I should cast an inaccurate replica outta plaster or sumpin and mail it to ya.


Put one of those lipstick smoochies on it and scribble "Kitty approved" on it and I'll send more sandwiches.  :  )
 
2013-09-17 09:23:42 PM  
LAWS A MERCY :D
 
2013-09-17 09:34:38 PM  

bunner: Ricardo Klement: Gee - that sounds a lot like economic activity to me.

It is.

So's this.

[us.123rf.com image 400x267]
And this.

[www.backpocketcoo.com image 650x520]

And this

[wpblogger.com image 500x380]

Any of this sinking in yet?

Cause the banksters you're carrying water for aren't recording your IP so they can offer you that board member job any time soon.


Hey, someone lied to you and told you people were removing money from the economy - don't get angry with ME.
 
2013-09-17 09:57:20 PM  
Oh look, another piss and moan and gnash our teeth at the rich, thread. How cute. Don't you anger management class dropouts ever have anything better to do than daydream about your upcoming revolution? (I mean when you're not helping the poor---who you also denigrate.)
 
2013-09-17 10:02:40 PM  

wolfpaq777: / try not to use words like "only", it makes it really easy to prove you wrong, although given how stupid your post was I'm guessing it's not that hard to do even when you aren't speaking in absolutes


Okay then show me where a liberal called the current president a "Messiah". One link will do, that is if our reading skills are up to it.
Difficulty: no blogs or opinion sites, legit news sources only.

Moran.
/you're probably the rodent, aren't you?
 
2013-09-17 10:02:46 PM  
Delectatio Morosa WAAH they be dissin the precious

And we should listen to you carry water for obscenely wealthy thieves who don't NEED to BE thieves why, exactly?
 
2013-09-17 10:15:16 PM  
wolfpaq777: (blather excised)

One link will do, that is if your reading skills are up to it.
Difficulty: no blogs or opinion sites (this means no FreeRepublic), legit news sources only.

/I dislike typos
 
2013-09-18 12:03:34 AM  
I see people are still defending taking more than their fair share of stuff..

You  know someone starved to death between you starting to read this post and now. Read it again and it will still be true.
 
2013-09-18 12:07:00 AM  

EWreckedSean: That said, it is only one factor to success. I could spend three days a week cutting my lawn with scissors. What you do or don't do is equally as important as how hard you work at it. You can be the best janitor in a company. That might get you some extra shifts, a better raise and some over time that puts you ahead of the worst janitor, but your aren't going to become CEO of the company. Also doesn't mean you weren't rewarded for working harder either...


But with all the extra hours you get, you can save up the money and then eventually start your own company and be CEO of that.
 
2013-09-18 12:15:48 AM  

CheapEngineer: In the midst of standing on your soapbox and proclaiming how perfect your plan is, and how well it's gone so far pray consider the possibility that not everyone will happen upon the same circumstances as you. Imagine that the times when opportunity went well for you go the other way for someone else. Stretch your mind for the concept of "there but for the grace of God go I" when someone tells you that the breaks *didn't* fall for them like they have for you. Imagine if you will how random chance handing another person a shiat sandwich may *not* be the result of being an idiot who can't manage the simple task of handling their money.

Nevermind. It was a silly request. I don't want you to strain something.


You realize, of course, that what I was suggesting was action that would help prevent getting whored over by a 'there, but for the grace of God, go I' event?   I am not some jackass talking about how
great it is to buy a home at 19 and have done it 3 times, and you could too, if you were as cool as me.

I was proposing the least risky course of action.
 
2013-09-18 12:24:50 AM  

The Patient: I am fairly sure you wouldn't get your security deposit back if you have to break your lease at the drop of a hat so you can move to where all the jobs are.


Depends.  Often, you can get it back if you find a new renter for the landlord.  They often simply want to make sure they have constant income.   Short of that, sign a month to month lease instead.  Sometimes, after you have a one year lease, it will revert to a month to month lease anyway if you do not sign a new lease.

 You might let them know if your circumstances and be sure to clean it up nicely.
I had to break a lease and I got my security deposit back ($1500) simply by talking to the landlord about a job loss by my roommate and I could not pay it long by myself.  He was happy to have communication  and a clean house, not a destroyed house that happens often when someone feels they are mad that life dealt them a bad hand.
 
2013-09-18 12:29:13 AM  

stir22: Nutsac_Jim: I certainly recognize that other people see things differently than me. Quite simply, they are wrong.

you had some great points in this thread...i agreed with you about the rent.

but it's statements like i quoted where you lose legitimacy.  and that's a shame.


Ha..  yeah, I guess you are right.  I was just trying to be funny at that point.  Been watching too much 'Big Bang Theory'.  :)
 
2013-09-18 09:44:04 AM  
Oh, for heaven's sake, already, there's only one way to help yourselves:  stop having babies, already.  Neither branch of the Republicrat Party are going to help you; they're just going to blow smoke up your butts and sell out to the Forbes 400.  You have to help yourselves by making yourselves less vulnerable to being jerked around by the J.P. Morgans of the world.  Show me a guy who's willing to work minimum wage toiling in the shiat mines, and I'll show you a chump with a bunch of hungry kids back in his shotgun shack.

Not having babies means not having to apologize to your kids for forcing them into an impoverished existence in a world that's rapidly turning into a global oligarchy.  Not having kids means less worker drones to keep the elite in power.  Not having kids means maybe having a few luxuries instead of a cockroach-infested home.  Not having kids means a more carefree life.  Worst case scenario, not having kids means you're not as vulnerable in a civil war.

Unless you're really hell-bent on being a parent, consider getting a snip job already.  Let the welfare queens and religious fanatics pop out the drones of the future.  Heck, the fertility rate in the USA is already close to 2.1 and it's below replacement level in nearly every industrial country in the world because people are waking up to realizing that parenthood is what keeps most people enslaved.  Labor follows the same law of supply and demand as any other commodity and the more scarce we peasants make ourselves, the better off we'll be...
 
2013-09-18 09:47:00 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: CheapEngineer: In the midst of standing on your soapbox and proclaiming how perfect your plan is, and how well it's gone so far pray consider the possibility that not everyone will happen upon the same circumstances as you. Imagine that the times when opportunity went well for you go the other way for someone else. Stretch your mind for the concept of "there but for the grace of God go I" when someone tells you that the breaks *didn't* fall for them like they have for you. Imagine if you will how random chance handing another person a shiat sandwich may *not* be the result of being an idiot who can't manage the simple task of handling their money.

Nevermind. It was a silly request. I don't want you to strain something.

You realize, of course, that what I was suggesting was action that would help prevent getting whored over by a 'there, but for the grace of God, go I' event?   I am not some jackass talking about how
great it is to buy a home at 19 and have done it 3 times, and you could too, if you were as cool as me.

I was proposing the least risky course of action.


Sure! I imagine it never occurs to people to *try* to stay out of debt, to live within your means. Thank goodness you're here to point out the non-obvious but logical path.

Bless you, kind sir.
 
2013-09-18 09:54:43 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: EWreckedSean: That said, it is only one factor to success. I could spend three days a week cutting my lawn with scissors. What you do or don't do is equally as important as how hard you work at it. You can be the best janitor in a company. That might get you some extra shifts, a better raise and some over time that puts you ahead of the worst janitor, but your aren't going to become CEO of the company. Also doesn't mean you weren't rewarded for working harder either...

But with all the extra hours you get, you can save up the money and then eventually start your own company and be CEO of that.


Owners of janitorial companies certainly make more than employees, and I can't imagine they require that much capital up front.
 
2013-09-18 10:09:40 AM  
Thought Experiment:  What if every poor person in the world decided that they were going on a baby strike and not having kids until they became a millionaire?  (Yes, this is highly unrealistic, but play with me.)  Would the ultra-rich be ecstatic that, within a generation or two, there would be no poor people to mooch off the rich?  Or would the ultra-rich be terrorized by the thought that there would soon be no desperate people to exploit for their labor?

Unless you really, really, really want to have kids or think your potential young'uns are going to be exceptional, why bother procreating?  Getting a snip job means one less tool to work for the rich and makes your life easier as well.

There's a reason that countries like South Korea and Germany have sub-replacement fertility levels.  It's because the people there increasingly don't want to live their lives like their grandparents lived--being dirt poor, popping out a lot of kids only to watch half of them die in childhood, working from dawn to dusk, and dying young from sheer exhaustion.  Fark that, stop being a tool already...
 
2013-09-18 10:10:56 AM  

Ricardo Klement: Hey, someone lied to you and told you people were removing money from the economy - don't get angry with ME.


I got an idea, kid.  Pretend I'm busy.  :  )
 
2013-09-18 11:15:06 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: Now shut your whore mouth for making an assumption that I paid cash for residence and then calling me a liar about it.


Nutsac_Jim:

You really ARE special. You must be able to send you kids to school and pay for it all!!! I'm sure you bought you house and car WITH CASH.

Yes, I did.   Funny things happen when you save money.   It grows into a bigger pile.



I say again. You sir, are a farking liar.
 
2013-09-18 11:16:52 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: He was happy to have communication and a clean house, not a destroyed house that happens often when someone feels they are mad that life dealt them a bad hand


You are right about this though. If you are up front and honest with a landlord and don't trash his house, they can be very VERY reasonable. I can't emphasize that enough.
 
2013-09-18 12:52:26 PM  
I see people are still defending taking more than their fair share of stuff..

You  know someone starved to death between you starting to read this post and now. Read it again and it will still be true.


Hilarious concept, bro!
 
2013-09-18 04:43:54 PM  

Psycat: Thought Experiment:  What if every poor person in the world decided that they were going on a baby strike and not having kids until they became a millionaire?  (Yes, this is highly unrealistic, but play with me.)  Would the ultra-rich be ecstatic that, within a generation or two, there would be no poor people to mooch off the rich?  Or would the ultra-rich be terrorized by the thought that there would soon be no desperate people to exploit for their labor?


How dreadful! The ultra rich would have to...shudder...clean their own toilets.
 
Displayed 469 of 469 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report