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  
•       •       •

13057 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Feb 2014 at 10:55 AM (10 weeks 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 03:38:28 PM

Headso: 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.


If we simply raise minimum wage without requiring any further effort on the part of the people getting it, why shouldn't I, as the owner of Factory USA, move the factory to Mexico? If you force me to stay in the USA, why wouldn't I automate the plant? If I ran McBurger USA, why wouldn't I just replace people with robots? That's happening by the way, food service businesses are going with robots.

In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.
 
2014-02-08 03:38:57 PM

Z-clipped: 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.


You and I know... this will not happen.
 
2014-02-08 03:44:30 PM

Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.


as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.
 
2014-02-08 03:49:26 PM

Shades: The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.


Or to put enough capital into the economy to launch new consumer demand like a missile to the point where ditch diggers can actually get paid to dig ditches.
 
2014-02-08 03:51:46 PM

Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.


How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.
 
2014-02-08 03:51:51 PM
See, all these Econ 101 scenarios have a major flaw.  They are all predicated on the assumption that the people with all the capital, having glommed huge amounts of it, should say "Well, we done got that, so we're gonna keep that and now we have ta figger out to get a lot more of it without actually putting any of that big ass truck full of it back into play."  Uh, no.
 
2014-02-08 03:54:09 PM

Shades: nobody rides for free.


www.biz.uiowa.edu
                     Next platitude, please.
 
2014-02-08 03:57:25 PM

Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.


But all of the jobs have been automated or outsourced- so who are these people still working?  Is there a demand for them?
 
2014-02-08 03:59:28 PM

Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.


you wouldn't be working to support them anymore than you'd be working to support yourself if each person had a min income, all that extra money a person might make working hard as a trust fund child or a bankster would be extra income.
 
2014-02-08 03:59:49 PM
But they work harder at whining than the poors.
 
2014-02-08 03:59:59 PM

AlwaysRightBoy: Z-clipped: 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.

You and I know... this will not happen.


mysonhasaids.files.wordpress.com

Yeah how dare us poors have the unmitigated gall to bear resentment against people who have made us a nation of $10 an hour or less and no benefits. I mean really what kind of parasitic crybaby thinks they should be able to take their kids to a doctor! A DOCTOR PEOPLE! Can you believe there even those out there who have got it into their heads that because we aren't paid enough to comfortably support a family of 0.5 we should earn more. But the worst are those unpatriotic turds who waste their money on meaningless crap like food, bills and medicine when they know Sarah Bear is planning a 2016 run.

The sooner the boomers die off the better. The part of me deep, deep, deep deep down that believes that people are inherently good has the goobledygook theory that the A.C.A. was Intentionally crippled to help nature take its course. After you're all dead we'll see a single payer system passed with broad bipartisan support.
 
2014-02-08 04:00:20 PM

Wally007: Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.

But all of the jobs have been automated or outsourced- so who are these people still working?  Is there a demand for them?


Somebody has to design the robots, I suppose. That or we must inevitably turn into the Judge Dredd universe.
 
2014-02-08 04:02:41 PM
Do we really still believe that success means "I got enough money to last me for 10,000 life times and I'm KEEPING it!"?  Do we?   Has our perception of what it means to be a successful human being truly never evolved past 6th grade recess?  And if not, do we have any business complaining when the people we bestow the mantle of success upon piss down our backs as we genuflect?
 
2014-02-08 04:04:50 PM

Headso: Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.

you wouldn't be working to support them anymore than you'd be working to support yourself if each person had a min income, all that extra money a person might make working hard as a trust fund child or a bankster would be extra income.


Oh, I see. You don't understand what wealth is or how societies function. You see, a great many material things must be made in order to continue and further society. We call that "wealth". People not working simply consume wealth without creating any. Those of us creating wealth will eventually get the idea that we would have more wealth for ourselves if we didn't have to give any away to the freeloaders. Makes sense?
 
2014-02-08 04:05:54 PM

Shades: freeloaders.


See GE post.
 
2014-02-08 04:11:08 PM

ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: Z-clipped: 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.

You and I know... this will not happen.

[mysonhasaids.files.wordpress.com image 707x600]

Yeah how dare us poors have the unmitigated gall to bear resentment against people who have made us a nation of $10 an hour or less and no benefits. I mean really what kind of parasitic crybaby thinks they should be able to take their kids to a doctor! A DOCTOR PEOPLE! Can you believe there even those out there who have got it into their heads that because we aren't paid enough to comfortably support a family of 0.5 we should earn more. But the worst are those unpatriotic turds who waste their money on meaningless crap like food, bills and medicine when they know Sarah Bear is planning a 2016 run.

The sooner the boomers die off the better. The part of me deep, deep, deep deep down that believes that people are inherently good has the goobledygook theory that the A.C.A. was Intentionally crippled to help nature take its course. After you're all dead we'll see a single payer system passed with broad bipartisan support.


OUR president is a boomer.
 
2014-02-08 04:12:10 PM
When I see a thread like this, it isn't the 1% that I find whiny.
 
2014-02-08 04:13:12 PM

06Wahoo: When I see a thread like this, it isn't the 1% that I find whiny.


They probably don't have FARK accounts.
 
2014-02-08 04:14:48 PM

Shades: Headso: Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.

you wouldn't be working to support them anymore than you'd be working to support yourself if each person had a min income, all that extra money a person might make working hard as a trust fund child or a bankster would be extra income.

Oh, I see. You don't understand what wealth is or how societies function. You see, a great many material things must be made in order to continue and further society. We call that "wealth". People not working simply consume wealth without creating any. Those of us creating wealth will eventually get the idea that we would have more wealth for ourselves if we didn't have to give any away to the freeloaders. Makes sense?


there's no jobs but skilled labor that pay well because it is in high demand and can't be automated in your society and capital gains on the labor robots are doing. If that 15% of the population who are "working" and those reaping the majority of the capital gains want to get uppity they can have their heads removed from their bodies by the other 85% of people.
 
2014-02-08 04:15:15 PM

Z-clipped: 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.


Succinctly put; well said; bears repeating; farking THIS.

Cut, paste, and save Z-clipped's comment above for the next Class Warfare accusation from the game-riggers.
 
2014-02-08 04:18:03 PM

Headso: Shades: Headso: Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.

you wouldn't be working to support them anymore than you'd be working to support yourself if each person had a min income, all that extra money a person might make working hard as a trust fund child or a bankster would be extra income.

Oh, I see. You don't understand what wealth is or how societies function. You see, a great many material things must be made in order to continue and further society. We call that "wealth". People not working simply consume wealth without creating any. Those of us creating wealth will eventually get the idea that we would have more wealth for ourselves if we didn't have to give any away to the freeloaders. Makes sense?

there's no jobs but skilled labor that pay well because it is in high demand and can't be automated in your society and capital gains on the labor robots are doing. If that 15% of the population who are "working" and those reaping the majority of the capital gains want to get uppity they can have their heads removed from their bodies by the other 85% of people.


Oh, you're one of those. Good day.
 
2014-02-08 04:18:48 PM
"There is a class war.  And we're winning." - Warren Buffet
 
2014-02-08 04:31:14 PM

06Wahoo: When I see a thread like this, it isn't the 1% that I find whiny.


Yeah, it's pretty whiny to be all like "Our economy is unsustainable" or "People don't make a living wage" or "Wages have been stagnant for 30 years for 60% of the population"

Call the wahhambulance am I right?
 
2014-02-08 04:32:08 PM

AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: Z-clipped: 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.

You and I know... this will not happen.

[mysonhasaids.files.wordpress.com image 707x600]

Yeah how dare us poors have the unmitigated gall to bear resentment against people who have made us a nation of $10 an hour or less and no benefits. I mean really what kind of parasitic crybaby thinks they should be able to take their kids to a doctor! A DOCTOR PEOPLE! Can you believe there even those out there who have got it into their heads that because we aren't paid enough to comfortably support a family of 0.5 we should earn more. But the worst are those unpatriotic turds who waste their money on meaningless crap like food, bills and medicine when they know Sarah Bear is planning a 2016 run.

The sooner the boomers die off the better. The part of me deep, deep, deep deep down that believes that people are inherently good has the goobledygook theory that the A.C.A. was Intentionally crippled to help nature take its course. After you're all dead we'll see a single payer system passed with broad bipartisan support.

OUR president is a boomer.


Oh are you one of those derps who assume because I idenitify as democrat I think Obama walks on water? Let me let you in on a little secret, those people don't exist anywhere except for the fevered imaginations of terrified old white guys. Just because you people treat anyone shrieks loud enough about guns, messicans and baby jesus like the farking messiah you shouldn't assume the other does the same.
 
2014-02-08 04:56:55 PM

MayoSlather: "Wages have been stagnant for 30 years for 60% of the population"


And will likely decline until people who work for a living figure out a way to bring in thirty times what they're paid every day by serving an economy with no money to spend on anything.
 
2014-02-08 04:59:10 PM

ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: Z-clipped: 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.

You and I know... this will not happen.

[mysonhasaids.files.wordpress.com image 707x600]

Yeah how dare us poors have the unmitigated gall to bear resentment against people who have made us a nation of $10 an hour or less and no benefits. I mean really what kind of parasitic crybaby thinks they should be able to take their kids to a doctor! A DOCTOR PEOPLE! Can you believe there even those out there who have got it into their heads that because we aren't paid enough to comfortably support a family of 0.5 we should earn more. But the worst are those unpatriotic turds who waste their money on meaningless crap like food, bills and medicine when they know Sarah Bear is planning a 2016 run.

The sooner the boomers die off the better. The part of me deep, deep, deep deep down that believes that people are inherently good has the goobledygook theory that the A.C.A. was Intentionally crippled to help nature take its course. After you're all dead we'll see a single payer system passed with broad bipartisan support.

OUR president is a boomer.

Oh are you one of those derps who assume because I idenitify as democrat I think Obama walks on water? Let me let you in on a little secret, those peo ...


Do you know what happens when you assume about something about people?
 
2014-02-08 05:01:37 PM
"All we gotta do is make stuff over here for 2.00 a day and then ship it back here for a 3,000 percent markup!"

"So, like, what do we do when the people who no longer make stuff here anymore run out of money?"


"They can take out loans!"


"Are people that stupid?"
 
2014-02-08 05:13:20 PM

ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: ScaryBottles: AlwaysRightBoy: Z-clipped: 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.

You and I know... this will not happen.

[mysonhasaids.files.wordpress.com image 707x600]

Yeah how dare us poors have the unmitigated gall to bear resentment against people who have made us a nation of $10 an hour or less and no benefits. I mean really what kind of parasitic crybaby thinks they should be able to take their kids to a doctor! A DOCTOR PEOPLE! Can you believe there even those out there who have got it into their heads that because we aren't paid enough to comfortably support a family of 0.5 we should earn more. But the worst are those unpatriotic turds who waste their money on meaningless crap like food, bills and medicine when they know Sarah Bear is planning a 2016 run.

The sooner the boomers die off the better. The part of me deep, deep, deep deep down that believes that people are inherently good has the goobledygook theory that the A.C.A. was Intentionally crippled to help nature take its course. After you're all dead we'll see a single payer system passed with broad bipartisan support.

OUR president is a boomer.

Oh are you one of those derps who assume because I idenitify as democrat I think Obama walks on water? Let me let you in on a little secret, those peo ...


learn to read boomer killer
 
2014-02-08 05:18:55 PM
ScaryBottles:

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 image 580x1019]


Since when did "fool" make people sound old?

/I said consummate V's: comsummate!
//geez...
 
2014-02-08 05:23:34 PM
Ruiizu: 

Since when did "fool" make people sound old?

For that matter, when did we buy the notion that old people are automatically uninformed fools, wholesale?  Oh yeah.  As soon as people under 40 bought into the idea that the sun shines out of their ass because they're not 50.
 
2014-02-08 05:28:17 PM
An article that summarizes two articles that had been previously greenlit gets greenlit.


i.imgur.com

/now we know how to get greenlit
 
2014-02-08 05:37:28 PM

Shades: Headso: Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.

you wouldn't be working to support them anymore than you'd be working to support yourself if each person had a min income, all that extra money a person might make working hard as a trust fund child or a bankster would be extra income.

Oh, I see. You don't understand what wealth is or how societies function. You see, a great many material things must be made in order to continue and further society. We call that "wealth". People not working simply consume wealth without creating any. Those of us creating wealth will eventually get the idea that we would have more wealth for ourselves if we didn't have to give any away to the freeloaders. Makes sense?


That's rich telling other people they don't understand the economy when your view is based on fallacies, a narrow minded view, a basic drive to blame all your problems on what you perceive as your "lessers".
 
2014-02-08 05:40:46 PM

Shades: Headso: Shades: Headso: Shades: In any case, none of your scenarios raise any individual's true income. The only real way to raise the cost of unskilled labor is to restrict the supply of it.

as you mention it isn't possible to restrict the supply of it because of technological advancement so if raises in minimum wage hastened automation or outsourcing then the next step would be a guaranteed minimum income for the citizenry.

How will you avoid this problem, that those if us working to support those who don't will come to see them as a useless drag on our own prosperity, and come to hate and despise them? Secular humanism is nice in theory, it just doesn't survive a collision with reality. Coke, toke, or poke, nobody rides for free.

you wouldn't be working to support them anymore than you'd be working to support yourself if each person had a min income, all that extra money a person might make working hard as a trust fund child or a bankster would be extra income.

Oh, I see. You don't understand what wealth is or how societies function. You see, a great many material things must be made in order to continue and further society. We call that "wealth". People not working simply consume wealth without creating any. Those of us creating wealth will eventually get the idea that we would have more wealth for ourselves if we didn't have to give any away to the freeloaders. Makes sense?


Also, your "us" rhetoric is laughable.
 
2014-02-08 05:43:27 PM

AlwaysRightBoy: Do you know what happens when you assume about something about people?


All too frequently they'll cite a tired aphorism that uses homonyms of fragments of a particular word to try to seem profound.

But maybe that won't happen now.
 
2014-02-08 06:42:14 PM

bunner: "There is a class war.  And we're winning whining." - Warren Buffet


FTFM
 
2014-02-08 06:51:10 PM

ThighsofGlory: bunner: I wonder if people with more money than Croesus ever stare out their windows and ponder if this sad little tap dance we all get to do is all there is and if, by the grace their vomit inducing avarice, they really have "won".  And whether that brief, hollow feeling when nobody is kissing their ass is what winning feels like.  I mean, sure, they just shake it off and go buy more useless, overpriced trash and then wave it around like it's the holy grail, but I can't help but wonder if they ever have the little attacks of existential angst that are the hallmark of living poor.

Nope. Not a one.




Then explain Tom Perkins.
 
2014-02-08 06:58:10 PM

bunner: Shades: nobody rides for free.

[www.biz.uiowa.edu image 300x299]
                     Next platitude, please.


It doesn't make sense to tax them since we're already giving them all those energy subsidies and juicy, juicy military contracts.
 
2014-02-08 07:16:56 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.   :  )


You could try a legion of miniature flying assault butts.
 
2014-02-08 08:39:59 PM

ransack.: [eil.com image 300x300]


Steven Tyler, Net worth: $130 million.
Joe Perry: $120 million
Tom Hamilton: $215 million
Joey Kramer: $100 million
Brad Whitford: $75 million

So... dinner time?

/Probably not that appetising... beef jerky-like.
 
2014-02-08 08:47:31 PM

Chameleon: You could try a legion of miniature flying assault butts.



:  /


:  \


:  |


Yeahhhhh.
 
2014-02-08 09:02:44 PM

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


You don't own money.

Ever.

It's not yours.

The people, in the form of government, own all money everywhere. You don't own it. You don't get to say "I earned it, I get to keep it!"

You didn't earn it in a vacuum. You earned it because society made it possible for you to earn it.

There is no such thing as "My" money or "Your" money. Just money. You use it for a while, I use it for a while, but it belongs to the government. They do have the power and every right to say "We're taxing this money to pay for society's needs." And you don't get to say what those needs are, except by exercising your right to vote. The civilized world has decided that it's not right for a few ultra-wealthy people to control all of the money. The civilized world has decided that the poor need protection from the rich, as the rich have proven time and time again that they will grind the poor into the dirt to earn fraction of a percentage more per quarter than they did last quarter. The civilized world has decided that the wealthy only got that way on the backs of the poor, and it's the responsibility of the wealthy to pay for those that paved the road for their success.
 
2014-02-08 09:27:39 PM

LavenderWolf: The people, in the form of government, own all money everywhere. You don't own it. You don't get to say "I earned it, I get to keep it!"


This looks like its shaping up to be one of those currency vs money things.  Are you sure you're going with that formulation?
 
2014-02-08 09:42:07 PM
See, the problem is, money and data move
i.imgur.com

and governance moves
i.imgur.com

Just add some icicles.  And government wouldn't have it any other way.
 
2014-02-08 09:46:14 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: LavenderWolf: The people, in the form of government, own all money everywhere. You don't own it. You don't get to say "I earned it, I get to keep it!"

This looks like its shaping up to be one of those currency vs money things.  Are you sure you're going with that formulation?


Don't split unrelated hairs.

My point is unequivocally clear. There isn't a rich person alive who has earned their wealth without the aid of society. They owe society literally every penny. I have no problem with people spending the money they earn, or gathering large sums of money for actual purposes. The real problems come from money-hoarding. If a single digit tax change has a six digit effect on your taxes, you make enough money off the backs of the poor to pay for their care.

Unspent money - savings over any reasonably necessary amount required to live extravagantly for generations - should be taxed at extremely high levels. I mean like 70% of money over a certain threshold. Your average person (your average ten thousand people combined, actually) couldn't hope to reach that threshold in two lifetimes of earning.

The ultra-rich are wrenches in the gears of the world economy. They have their money sit and earn interest, taking more and more out of circulation.

I don't think you understand the problem with money hoarding. Spent money drives economies. People buying things. The ultra-wealthy, despite having billions of dollars more wealth, do not spend that money on things that actually create jobs. They might open/run businesses to create jobs themselves, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to the jobs created by a proper middle class economy. The whole "Job creator" meme needs to die. The ultra-wealthy don't create jobs, they stagnate economies.
 
2014-02-08 09:51:21 PM
LavenderWolf: The ultra-wealthy don't create jobs, they stagnate economies.


Tape this to your fridge.
 
2014-02-08 10:12:59 PM

LavenderWolf: I don't think you understand the problem with money hoarding. Spent money drives economies. People buying things. The ultra-wealthy, despite having billions of dollars more wealth, do not spend that money on things that actually create jobs. They might open/run businesses to create jobs themselves, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to the jobs created by a proper middle class economy. The whole "Job creator" meme needs to die. The ultra-wealthy don't create jobs, they stagnate economies.


I don't disagree with that at all.

I just think saying "Goverment owns the money" is a poor way to argue it, to the point of making it a non-sequitur.   The benefits of an active economy, and the point of supply being useless without demand would still apply even if people used bitcoins, dogecoins, or barter.
 
2014-02-08 10:21:46 PM
The Wealthy have this Nation brainwashed.   which proves they aren't even smart enough to plan for their long term survival.

the Lie won't last forever.  eventually, the truth always gets out.  any 9th grade history buff knows that.
 
2014-02-08 10:26:19 PM
the population is growing faster than advancements.
 
2014-02-08 10:34:37 PM

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

You don't own money.

Ever.

It's not yours.

The people, in the form of government, own all money everywhere. You don't own it. You don't get to say "I earned it, I get to keep it!"

You didn't earn it in a vacuum. You earned it because society made it possible for you to earn it.

There is no such thing as "My" money or "Your" money. Just money. You use it for a while, I use it for a while, but it belongs to the government. They do have the power and every right to say "We're taxing this money to pay for society's needs." And you don't get to say what those needs are, except by exercising your right to vote. The civilized world has decided that it's not right for a few ultra-wealthy people to control all of the money. The civilized world has decided that the poor need protection from the rich, as the rich have proven time and time again that they will grind the poor into the dirt to earn fraction of a percentage more per quarter than they did last quarter. The civilized world has decided that the wealthy only got that way on the backs of the poor, and it's the responsibility of the wealthy to pay for those that paved the road for their success.


So 35 years of sacrifice and labor at my job is for nothing? Should I have  just gone on the government dole in the first place? I'll try that next time around and see how it works.


knows about "My" money... it still not yours for the taking
 
2014-02-08 10:40:24 PM

haywatchthis: the population is growing faster than advancements.


No, the money is lagging behind about 20 years and the notion that an inexcusable amount of profit must be the result of implementation is the boulder blocking the road.  Nobody ever called Jonas Salk a no good sonofab*tch.
 
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 »






Report