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.

(Salon)   The whiniest members of the 1%   (salon.com) divider line 231
    More: Amusing, plutocracy, selfishness, American Justice  
•       •       •

13083 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Feb 2014 at 10:55 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



231 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-08 01:18:31 PM  
To those who threw hard work and there own ability became wealthy. More power to you.
To those who inherited daddies money and think everyone exist to serve them. Fark you you farking fark!
 
2014-02-08 01:19:18 PM  

haywatchthis: trappedspirit: That price is paid in the form of the growing contempt of their fellow citizens, a contempt that grows in proportion to the ever-increasing gap in America between the children of privilege and everyone else.

So, the more money a person has the more people will hate them?  That's some real insight there.  Or, check a fark thread.
Oh, and, guillotine.  Am I the first to guillotine this thread?

/guillotine

all you had to say was poor people are jealous


He managed to be stupid enough without including that turd of wisdom, actually.
 
2014-02-08 01:19:43 PM  

haywatchthis: all you had to say was poor people are jealous


Of what?  Precisely.
 
2014-02-08 01:20:18 PM  

haywatchthis: criminals


I did say "generally".  However, a thousand petty criminals that steal $1000 worth of stuff from WalMart, and then sell it and spend the money still contribute more than one shady investment banker who pockets a cool $1million under the table and sticks it in an offshore account.

You follow me?
 
2014-02-08 01:22:32 PM  

Z-clipped: haywatchthis: criminals

I did say "generally".  However, a thousand petty criminals that steal $1000 worth of stuff from WalMart, and then sell it and spend the money still contribute more than one shady investment banker who pockets a cool $1million under the table and sticks it in an offshore account.

You follow me?


Oh yes - I'm sure he possesses a full and intimate understanding of the concepts you are discussing.
No doubt.
Really. I mean it.
Stop laughing.
 
2014-02-08 01:24:35 PM  

0z79: Shades: The My Little Pony Killer: Shades: Always whining about wages being stagnant or falling since the 1960s, never saying WHY they've done that.  I'll help:
- Women entering the workforce in droves
- 1965 Immigration Act opening the floodgates to poor, uneducated immigrants

If you increase the supply of labor, the cost of labor drops.  Gosh, whodathunk?

That explains why white men are still being paid so much more...

They aren't, not for the same work.  Keep blaming others for your problems, though, that'll start paying off any decade now.  Look what it did for Detroit!

.....You kind of come across as a bigoted, old, redneck fool with white hair growing out of his ears, still hanging around and complaining that women and blacks have the right to vote.


Let's explore your theory- businesses could cut their payroll by X%, and get the same exact output in terms of quality and quantity, but refuse to do so because they're all so raaaaaaaaysis. Makes perfect sense!
 
2014-02-08 01:25:14 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: AlwaysRightBoy: Noted: other people's money belongs to the people who don't make that money.

No, not really - no intelligent adult would say that, and nobody does. That's a strawman argument - fit for middle school, but way too weak for Fark. 4chan, maybe.

And yet here we are at Fark whining about this. I know about the distribution of wealth in this nation. It's not fair in the least, but my question really is: Is it your money? Maybe I'll go to 4chan for the answer.

Sounds like a stupid, unanswerable question. And the only one who is whining here is you.

I don't whine, my little giraffe whines.


Well, then, collect their tears, trade them for Bitcoins, and .....Profit!
Your bootstraps, man! Get to yankin' on those motherf**kers!
 
2014-02-08 01:27:27 PM  

haywatchthis: all you had to say was poor people are jealous


I think you mean "envious".  Given the literal meaning of the word, it's the rich who are "jealous".
 
2014-02-08 01:28:57 PM  
I'm not sure how killing the rich would solve your problems.
 
2014-02-08 01:30:25 PM  

Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.


This we know, so change will only come when one changes ones "philosophical reasoning"? Sounds like that's been tried before.
 
2014-02-08 01:31:41 PM  

jso2897: Z-clipped: haywatchthis: criminals

I did say "generally".  However, a thousand petty criminals that steal $1000 worth of stuff from WalMart, and then sell it and spend the money still contribute more than one shady investment banker who pockets a cool $1million under the table and sticks it in an offshore account.

You follow me?

Oh yes - I'm sure he possesses a full and intimate understanding of the concepts you are discussing.
No doubt.
Really. I mean it.
Stop laughing.


www.commlawblog.com

*sigh*
 
2014-02-08 01:35:49 PM  

traylor: I'm not sure how killing the rich would solve your problems.


It would force the system to reboot, and, on the whole, is probably unnecessary because there's nothing left TO do but reboot the system with or without the cooperation of the greedheads or their safety or lack of it.  Violent revolt wouldn't be necessary unless thy try a mass exodus with all their pelf to whatever part of China the rest of their money already is.  And, historically, when the tanks roll, so will the tumbrels.  It never really ends well when a small collection of people take all the wealth and power and keep it.   Mostly, the world at large and the citizenry of the US are just waiting to see if they have the balls to put their trillions back into play and live by the capitalist dictum they claim to worship or if they're just dime store thieves heading for the parking lot.
 
2014-02-08 01:37:22 PM  
Globalized Capitalism at work:
Step 1. Move factories to Asia where labor is dirt cheap.
Step 2. Figure out how to completely automate factories.
Step 3. Bowing to pressure, return now-automated factories to US and hire sister's half-wit child to push the "off" button if anything screws up.
Step 4. You guessed it: profit!
 
2014-02-08 01:38:01 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: This we know, so change will only come when one changes ones "philosophical reasoning"? Sounds like that's been tried before.


Eh?  No.  I was commenting on the pointless preoccupation people seem to have these days with devising economic ideologies from oversimplified first principles, like "whose money is it, really?"
 
2014-02-08 01:42:25 PM  

Shades: The My Little Pony Killer: Shades: Always whining about wages being stagnant or falling since the 1960s, never saying WHY they've done that.  I'll help:
- Women entering the workforce in droves
- 1965 Immigration Act opening the floodgates to poor, uneducated immigrants

If you increase the supply of labor, the cost of labor drops.  Gosh, whodathunk?

That explains why white men are still being paid so much more...

They aren't, not for the same work.  Keep blaming others for your problems, though, that'll start paying off any decade now.  Look what it did for Detroit!


You are incredibly ignorant of the driving factors behind wage stagnation in the US. You really should just shut up or you're going to make yourself look like more of an idiotic misogynist/racist than you already have.
 
2014-02-08 01:43:18 PM  

jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.


But enough about our President.
 
2014-02-08 01:45:06 PM  
If I turned in schoolwork that was as lazy & half-assed as the average Slate/Salon article my teachers/professors would demand to know why if was mad at them and why.


/Please hire people who can actually WRITE.
 
2014-02-08 01:45:30 PM  

bunner: traylor: I'm not sure how killing the rich would solve your problems.

It would force the system to reboot, and, on the whole, is probably unnecessary because there's nothing left TO do but reboot the system with or without the cooperation of the greedheads or their safety or lack of it.


Also, according to the philosophy of conservative justice, it would serve as the best deterrent to the next group of plutocrats.
 
2014-02-08 01:46:50 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our Presidentmy mother, the whore.



See? Now we're BOTH really clever! :D
 
2014-02-08 01:47:46 PM  

Marshal805: If I turned in schoolwork that was as lazy & half-assed as the average Slate/Salon article my teachers/professors would demand to know why  if I was mad at them and why.


/Please hire people who can actually WRITE.


Forgot to preview.

My apologies.

/Hey, at least I don't expect a paycheck.
 
2014-02-08 01:48:22 PM  
I can write.  I desperately need a proofreader and an editor, but I can write.  I can't type for poo.
 
2014-02-08 01:49:23 PM  

traylor: I'm not sure how killing the rich would solve your problems.


It wouldn't - it's just people letting off steam - anyway, it's good for you, because it gives you a strawman that you can pretend is the serious opposition opinion - so everybody wins!
 
2014-02-08 01:50:22 PM  

8 inches: MayoSlather: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: AlwaysRightBoy: Noted: other people's money belongs to the people who don't make that money.

No, not really - no intelligent adult would say that, and nobody does. That's a strawman argument - fit for middle school, but way too weak for Fark. 4chan, maybe.

And yet here we are at Fark whining about this. I know about the distribution of wealth in this nation. It's not fair in the least, but my question really is: Is it your money? Maybe I'll go to 4chan for the answer.

It's the working class' money. They did the work, but the wealthy are taking the gains simply because they can due to having more leverage.

No one on this planet does or has done the work equivalent to a million people. No one. Not Einstein, not Jonas Salk, not Thomas Jefferson, not Mahatma Ghandi...Their contributions in their place and time were significant, but someone else would have stepped in, someone else would have figured out what they did eventually.

The irony here is that these men that you could potentially deem more valuable than a million were humanists, and never would have claimed their worth was equivalent to what the contemporary rich claim they're worth. Today's rich who by the way contribute little of value.

This is an issue of sheer avarice, and a rigged system. It's not about ethically protecting the coffers of the rich who have long been morally reprehensible.

In all honesty, you are a fool.

Also, Mayo is a disgusting condiment and you should feel bad.

/You're adopted.


Are like 86 or something? Seriously? A fool? I bet you advocate the aspirin-between-the-knees contraceptive method and liked it better when the Joos, Skirts and and Blahs weren't bothering everybody with their whining.

www.plainolas.com
 
2014-02-08 01:50:59 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: But enough about our President.


www.quickmeme.com
 
2014-02-08 01:55:38 PM  

machodonkeywrestler: Shades: The My Little Pony Killer: Shades: Always whining about wages being stagnant or falling since the 1960s, never saying WHY they've done that.  I'll help:
- Women entering the workforce in droves
- 1965 Immigration Act opening the floodgates to poor, uneducated immigrants

If you increase the supply of labor, the cost of labor drops.  Gosh, whodathunk?

That explains why white men are still being paid so much more...

They aren't, not for the same work.  Keep blaming others for your problems, though, that'll start paying off any decade now.  Look what it did for Detroit!

You are incredibly ignorant of the driving factors behind wage stagnation in the US. You really should just shut up or you're going to make yourself look like more of an idiotic misogynist/racist than you already have.


Please, dazzle me with your theory about how pumping tens of millions of poor uneducated people into the market has been or could possibly have been good for our native poor uneducated people. Tell me how, say, greatly increasing the number of doctors will increase the wages of doctors. This'll be good.
 
2014-02-08 01:56:57 PM  

jso2897: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our Presidentmy mother, the whore.


See? Now we're BOTH really clever! :D


My mother is Mother whore to you. For the next time.
 
2014-02-08 01:57:05 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.


www.debbiereber.com

The Derp store called.....
 
2014-02-08 02:00:33 PM  

Shades: machodonkeywrestler: Shades: The My Little Pony Killer: Shades: Always whining about wages being stagnant or falling since the 1960s, never saying WHY they've done that.  I'll help:
- Women entering the workforce in droves
- 1965 Immigration Act opening the floodgates to poor, uneducated immigrants

If you increase the supply of labor, the cost of labor drops.  Gosh, whodathunk?

That explains why white men are still being paid so much more...

They aren't, not for the same work.  Keep blaming others for your problems, though, that'll start paying off any decade now.  Look what it did for Detroit!

You are incredibly ignorant of the driving factors behind wage stagnation in the US. You really should just shut up or you're going to make yourself look like more of an idiotic misogynist/racist than you already have.

Please, dazzle me with your theory about how pumping tens of millions of poor uneducated people into the market has been or could possibly have been good for our native poor uneducated people. Tell me how, say, greatly increasing the number of doctors will increase the wages of doctors. This'll be good.


Adding those people didn't make the GDP even skip a beat, the money is being made, the problem is the tax structure minimum wage is too low and lack of organized labor so it isn't being made by the right people.
 
2014-02-08 02:10:24 PM  
It's easy to fall into quantative fallacies like more doctors = more better for doctors / more marginally educated people = more better economy because all of this dog and pony postulation and presuming is based on the notion that an economy is something that the poor should serve and should then, in turn, serve the currency at hand that supports it and the people who have the most of it.  That is total bullsh*t.  ALL of this stuff, every bank note, every building, every technology, every field of wheat is all supposed to serve the society that produces it.  Bet they don't teach that in Econ. 101.  Once you spit out the warty dick of capital über alles, the world starts making sense.
 
2014-02-08 02:17:45 PM  

super_grass: Teens are dumb and whiny as fark, even kids of rich people.

Now feast your eyes in spoiled stupidity:

][www.boredpanda.com image 605x780]

[www.boredpanda.com image 605x553]
[www.boredpanda.com image 605x749]


At least half of those people are clearly being ironic.
The other half aren't really whining.
 
2014-02-08 02:19:47 PM  
Lemme try and summarize why we keep throwing ourselves into canyons for rich people.

This is how capital is sold by capitalists.

saintsherald.files.wordpress.com

This is how it really works.


www.apollotools.com
 
2014-02-08 02:21:49 PM  

ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.



The Derp store called.....


Is "derp" the cool word of the internet nowadays, because I want to be a part of it!!!!
 
2014-02-08 02:26:57 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.

The Derp store called.....

Is "derp" the cool word of the internet nowadays, because I want to be a part of it!!!!


No actually its a cliche, and a tired one. Tell me though who is really the douchebag here gramps? The guy tossing out the tired meme or the guy it still describes succinctly?
 
2014-02-08 02:29:27 PM  

bunner: Lemme try and summarize why we keep throwing ourselves into canyons for rich people.

This is how capital is sold by capitalists.

[saintsherald.files.wordpress.com image 850x620]

This is how it really works.


[www.apollotools.com image 625x525]


Not only is it a blatant falsehood that capital needs to coalesce in a few hands to be useful, but we now have things like kickstarter, which are more organic and non destructive to an economy as a mechanism for raising capital.
 
2014-02-08 02:32:55 PM  

MayoSlather: bunner: Lemme try and summarize why we keep throwing ourselves into canyons for rich people.

This is how capital is sold by capitalists.

[saintsherald.files.wordpress.com image 850x620]

This is how it really works.


[www.apollotools.com image 625x525]

Not only is it a blatant falsehood that capital needs to coalesce in a few hands to be useful, but we now have things like kickstarter, which are more organic and non destructive to an economy as a mechanism for raising capital.


Yeah, I had one up for a bit.  Apparently, there weren't more than 4 people interested in helping me make a good record.  Maybe next time, I'll try and write a children's book about rainbow farting unicorns with a pop up cardboard goat.   :  )
 
2014-02-08 02:39:48 PM  

Headso: Shades: machodonkeywrestler: Shades: The My Little Pony Killer: Shades: Always whining about wages being stagnant or falling since the 1960s, never saying WHY they've done that.  I'll help:
- Women entering the workforce in droves
- 1965 Immigration Act opening the floodgates to poor, uneducated immigrants

If you increase the supply of labor, the cost of labor drops.  Gosh, whodathunk?

That explains why white men are still being paid so much more...

They aren't, not for the same work.  Keep blaming others for your problems, though, that'll start paying off any decade now.  Look what it did for Detroit!

You are incredibly ignorant of the driving factors behind wage stagnation in the US. You really should just shut up or you're going to make yourself look like more of an idiotic misogynist/racist than you already have.

Please, dazzle me with your theory about how pumping tens of millions of poor uneducated people into the market has been or could possibly have been good for our native poor uneducated people. Tell me how, say, greatly increasing the number of doctors will increase the wages of doctors. This'll be good.

Adding those people didn't make the GDP even skip a beat, the money is being made, the problem is the tax structure minimum wage is too low and lack of organized labor so it isn't being made by the right people.


Your example is mostly a non-sequitur. I didn't ask how doubling the poor uneducated labor pool affected the economy, I asked how it helped them. An illustration:

I own a factory. Let's call it Factory USA. I employ 100 people to make widgets, and we have agreed that their pay is $20/hr. After a few years, I have enough money to open a second factory, Factory USA Prime. However, I would have to pay the next 100 people $30/hr to work there, as there's nobody left who will agree to work for $20/hr. I decide to think about it.

Then one day, the government magics a second group of people into existence who WILL work for $20/hr. I immediately swing into action.

In the end, I have doubled my personal GDP, and employed twice as many people, good for the nation's GDP. However, the poor uneducated people I employ are making the exact same wage- not so good for them.

The real situation is closer to the government magicking 30,000,000 people into existence who will work for $0.50/hr, but I think you can see my point.
 
2014-02-08 02:40:49 PM  

ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.

The Derp store called.....

Is "derp" the cool word of the internet nowadays, because I want to be a part of it!!!!

No actually its a cliche, and a tired one. Tell me though who is really the douchebag here gramps? The guy tossing out the tired meme or the guy it still describes succinctly?


Actually I'm just an old guy asking to go about it in civil way as opposed to all this classwar way. I'm soooo wrong
 
2014-02-08 02:41:17 PM  

bunner: MayoSlather: bunner: Lemme try and summarize why we keep throwing ourselves into canyons for rich people.

This is how capital is sold by capitalists.

[saintsherald.files.wordpress.com image 850x620]

This is how it really works.


[www.apollotools.com image 625x525]

Not only is it a blatant falsehood that capital needs to coalesce in a few hands to be useful, but we now have things like kickstarter, which are more organic and non destructive to an economy as a mechanism for raising capital.

Yeah, I had one up for a bit.  Apparently, there weren't more than 4 people interested in helping me make a good record.  Maybe next time, I'll try and write a children's book about rainbow farting unicorns with a pop up cardboard goat.   :  )


mediad.publicbroadcasting.net

Too late.
 
2014-02-08 02:47:26 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.

The Derp store called.....

Is "derp" the cool word of the internet nowadays, because I want to be a part of it!!!!


Was "derp" before it became cool:

weknowmemes.com
 
2014-02-08 02:50:44 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.

The Derp store called.....

Is "derp" the cool word of the internet nowadays, because I want to be a part of it!!!!

No actually its a cliche, and a tired one. Tell me though who is really the douchebag here gramps? The guy tossing out the tired meme or the guy it still describes succinctly?

Actually I'm just an old guy asking to go about it in civil way as opposed to all this classwar way. I'm soooo wrong


Your context implies that both sides are at fault for this supposed "class war" they aren't. When the ghouls you are throwing yourself on the grenade for stop doing shiat like shipping jobs overseas, laying off thousands despite record profits and blaming the scary blah guy in the White House for it all then I may revisit my tone. Until then I'm still voting for public executions Beijing style.
 
2014-02-08 02:53:56 PM  

Shades: The real situation is closer to the government magicking 30,000,000 people into existence who will work for $0.50/hr, but I think you can see my point.


Your point doesn't take into account that those people all become consumers as well so the ones that earn money spend it just like everyone else. Every person "magicked" into existence that went to work for a union shop earns whatever the other guys in the union earn at that job. Every one that went to work for minimum wage earns the same minimum wage as everyone else. If there were more unions and a higher minimum wage it would help all those people just like it would help  the real merkins who had family come over on the mayflower.
 
2014-02-08 02:56:21 PM  

grumpyoldmann: I wonder if his "affluenza" would stop a sniper's bullet.


Let's find out.
 
2014-02-08 03:11:09 PM  

ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.

The Derp store called.....

Is "derp" the cool word of the internet nowadays, because I want to be a part of it!!!!

No actually its a cliche, and a tired one. Tell me though who is really the douchebag here gramps? The guy tossing out the tired meme or the guy it still describes succinctly?

Actually I'm just an old guy asking to go about it in civil way as opposed to all this classwar way. I'm soooo wrong

Your context implies that both sides are at fault for this supposed "class war" they aren't. When the ghouls you are throwing yourself on the grenade for stop doing shiat like shipping jobs overseas, laying off thousands despite record profits and blaming the scary blah guy in the White House for it all then I may revisit my tone. Until then I'm still voting for public executions Beijing style.


Talk to President Clinton.

/leaving for Beijing tomorrow. Will eat the scorpion blood that. is....
 
2014-02-08 03:11:27 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: Actually I'm just an old guy asking to go about it in civil way as opposed to all this classwar way. I'm soooo wrong


Advocating for a higher top marginal tax bracket is not class warfare.
Advocating for a more balanced collective bargaining framework is not class warfare.
Advocating for restricting offshore tax havens and outsourced labor is not class warfare.
Advocating for corporate salary regulations, or a better social safety net is not class warfare.

It wasn't class war when F.D.R. did it, and it ain't now.

You want civility? Help realign the system to smooth out the distribution of wealth and income so our economy improves.  That's the civil solution.  Don't, and you just might see some uncivil solutions.
 
2014-02-08 03:14:13 PM  

super_grass: Teens are dumb and whiny as fark, even kids of rich people.

Now feast your eyes in spoiled stupidity:

][www.boredpanda.com image 605x780]

[www.boredpanda.com image 605x553]
[www.boredpanda.com image 605x749]


"Fark you Santa. I wanted an Iphone"

Hilarious
 
2014-02-08 03:17:53 PM  

Linux_Yes: 20 years??   and he would have gotten out in 2 or 3.  don't exaggerate.


poor little rich kid.  ):   its tough all over.


You know what I got for Christmas? Oh, it was a banner farking year at the old Bender family. I got a carton of cigarettes. The old man grabbed me and said, "Hey, smoke up Johnny." Alright? So go home and cry to your Daddy. Don't cry here, okay?
 
2014-02-08 03:20:11 PM  
So, what have we learned?

Capitalism is a valuable method for certain things but only when used in concert with other ideologies and methods and the whole idea for the end result is to improve the quality of life.


As a religion, it's as poisonous as pretty much any other religion.


The people who have hoarded all of the available wealth into a few hands have been dismantling our way if life and bending us over the sink for decades, and who is or isn't in office has nothing to do with their disingenuous greedcraft.  And we can't vote for or against them.


Opportunity no longer exists unless that opportunity includes making a rich person richer.


We are largely quite happy to endlessly turn upon each other, like a pack of digs when the master holds up a steak, instead of addressing the sources of our poverty.


Bread and circuses still works.


History is sitting with a bag of crap in one hand and the fan switch in the other and we're pretty sure it doesn't mean US.


The egregious acquisition of everything that isn't nailed down will likely continue unabated because there's no redress against government approved thievery and the preponderance of the people practicing it seem to be delusional sociopaths.


They're getting pissy and "aw shucks" about our growing disdain for their unconscionable behaviors.


Any questions?  Answers?  Anybody want a tic tac?  See the proctor for your grade.
 
2014-02-08 03:21:13 PM  

jso2897: haywatchthis: trappedspirit: That price is paid in the form of the growing contempt of their fellow citizens, a contempt that grows in proportion to the ever-increasing gap in America between the children of privilege and everyone else.

So, the more money a person has the more people will hate them?  That's some real insight there.  Or, check a fark thread.
Oh, and, guillotine.  Am I the first to guillotine this thread?

/guillotine

all you had to say was poor people are jealous

He managed to be stupid enough without including that turd of wisdom, actually.


The moment you realize someone mad, tho
 
2014-02-08 03:31:25 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: jso2897: Z-clipped: AlwaysRightBoy: Correct, but not everyone contributes to society.
/otherwise very well said.

Basically, there's a certain distribution of income/wealth that is ideal for a consumer economy.  At the moment, the consumer base is too small and the rich are too rich, so things aren't moving as well as they could.  We can grow the base by taxation/redistribution, we can grow it by regulating corporate pay structures, we can grow it by shifting the power in collective bargaining... It doesn't matter much how the money gets back down to the people who will spend it, as long as it gets there.

Devise whatever philosophical reasoning you need to come up with about "who owns the fruit of who's labor".  It' makes no difference in the long run.

Pragmatism is wasted on ideologues. They are RIGHT - and hang the consequences.

But enough about our President.

The Derp store called.....

Is "derp" the cool word of the internet nowadays, because I want to be a part of it!!!!

No actually its a cliche, and a tired one. Tell me though who is really the douchebag here gramps? The guy tossing out the tired meme or the guy it still describes succinctly?

Actually I'm just an old guy asking to go about it in civil way as opposed to all this classwar way. I'm soooo wrong

Your context implies that both sides are at fault for this supposed "class war" they aren't. When the ghouls you are throwing yourself on the grenade for stop doing shiat like shipping jobs overseas, laying off thousands despite record profits and blaming the scary blah guy in the White House for it all then I may revisit my tone. Until then I'm still voting for public executions Beijing style.

Talk to President Clinton.

/leaving for Beijing tomorrow. Will eat the scorpion blood that. is....


 And with "But. But..Clinton!" we're done.

24.media.tumblr.com

Maybe try the comments over at yahoo news I think thats a little more your speed.
 
2014-02-08 03:38:24 PM  

AlwaysRightBoy: Actually I'm just an old guy asking to go about it in civil way as opposed to all this classwar way. I'm soooo wrong


meh, why? Some of the rhetoric can target people that are into civility but nothing wrong with lower brow rhetoric that targets more emotional voters.
 
Displayed 50 of 231 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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