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.

(CNBC)   CEO of luxury company tells Americans to quit biatching about being poor because they're probably wealthy compared to people in India   (cnbc.com) divider line 279
    More: Dumbass, Squawk Box  
•       •       •

5940 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Feb 2014 at 9:04 PM (26 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-12 10:54:35 PM

Bucky Katt: Nemo's Brother: The One True TheDavid: By the way, people used to think that the Third World poor would one day be up to the First World's poverty line; instead it seems like the trend goes the other way, that it won't be long before the USA is a Third World country.

Only leftists with no understanding of economics or scarcity thought that way.

care to enlighten us, professor?


He has only recently started spelling the word "economics" correctly.
Baby steps.
 
2014-02-12 10:56:00 PM

ChildOfBhaal: Almost Everybody Poops: You seriously think it's debatable on whether or not it's the same to be poor in America rather than Bangledesh?  And on your second point, for the last 30 years we've had wealth distribution from the poor and middle class up to the top, but as soon as people complain about that it's "class warfare".

Oh, and tell me about your years in poverty, I'm sure it's equatable to living on 30 dollars a month working in dangerous working conditions.

Your first sentence: No, I don't.  And I don't know why you are attributing this view to me.

Your second sentence:  I think you left some words out or recast the sentence in the middle or something.  But I basically get what you mean.  Since the seventies, income inequality has skyrocketed.  Which, you know, I referenced.  And not to call anything "class warfare."  Again, I don't know why you're attributing these views to me.

Your third sentence:  I'm not sure that I want to get into my personal history.  I rather doubt that you want that either.  And it would idiotic to equate my lifestyle to that of a person working in a Third World sweatshop.  Which was, you know, more or less my original point.

Go back and re-read the entire exchange that set you off, including the portions I previously deleted for brevity.  It starts at comment #62.  After you've done all that, let's try this again...


I skimmed the thread and your comment stood out, so I'll reread it in detail and apologize for jumping to conclusions.
 
2014-02-12 10:56:22 PM

debug: Fano: debug: Well, lets take away everything he has, give him 35k a year and plop him down in the middle of Manhattan and see how special and rich he feels.

Of course 35k is great in India.  A house costs like 20K, maybe 25k if you get electricity and running water. (yes, I made that up)

yes you did make that up. food and housing is relatively more expensive in say, hyderabad

More expensive than where?  Manhattan?


relative to the salary you would be making there. food takes up a bigger proportion of an indian household's budget.
 
2014-02-12 10:56:25 PM

AirForceVet: Terrible logic from this CEO. Claiming our poor are wealthy as compared to 99% of the rest of humanity leaves out other First World countries like Japan, Canada, Iceland, France, Germany, and even Second World countries.  The dumbass is lumping our poor with the Third World, forgetting about our own Fourth World populations.

/He's not been to any remote American Indian reservations like Pine Ridge obviously.


Come on. You claim to be ex military, you should at least know the terms right.

1) NATO is first world
2) Russia (and ex-soviet territories, I guess), China, and Cuba are second world
3) Everyone else is third world
4) There is no forth world. By definition, everyone not in 1st or 2nd is 3rd.

/Wouldn't be so bad if you weren't also in Huntsville
//https://xkcd.com/386/
///slashies
 
2014-02-12 10:56:34 PM

Almost Everybody Poops: but greed is a flaw in us humans


Greed, as you so put it, is one of your primary evolutionary traits. You happen to enjoy an environment that is so safe and wealthy that you rarely need to concern yourself with it; however, were that bubble to pop, you would instantly revert to normal. Greed is always there. It's healthy, it's honest, and like everything else, it can be taken to far.
 
2014-02-12 10:56:48 PM

Shryke: jso2897: If you want the law of the jungle

A typical strawman. Try again please. Private property rights are not "law of the jungle". Wealth redistribution is not "enlightened".


I didn't say that either was either. Do you want to talk to me, or to this guy?
i18.photobucket.com
 
2014-02-12 10:57:24 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Smackledorfer: Nutsac_Jim: MayoSlather: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: jso2897: Well, this is what I call "True Bullshiat" - technically, it's true - but in it's intended meaning, it's bullshiat.

I guess in a sense it's a somewhat poetic argument, since it means that nobody but the lowest man on the totem pole can complain about anything. Which if the 1% were logically consistent, would mean that they wouldn't complain about marginal increases to their tax rates because somebody else has it worse. Since they aren't, they compare themselves to Jews during the Holocaust, but I dream of the day on which they shut up because some kid in Ghana is eating dirt for lunch.

Well put. It's thinking that would tell a guy that comes into the emergency room with a compound fracture to stop his bellyaching because someone else has flesh eating bacteria.

Oddly enough, such an attitude will help one get through 99% of life.

True, but it isn't enough by itself. Or are your ambitions so low that you are satisfied with 'could be worse'?

 Yes, that is it.  I have no ambition because my attitude is to quit crying it could be worse.


You missed (deliberately?) the point.


You dismiss all complaints of wealth inequality by pretending that 'quit cryin' covers them all. But unless you are a zero ambition loser of some kind, you clearly aren't operating solely under the premise that 'where I am is fine because over there is worse' which is what you expect from the american poor.

I wasn't insulting your motivations, I was highlighting how ridiculous your summary of theirs is by applying it to you.


Wealth inequality still matters regardless how poor others are. Air quality too. Education quality.


Or perhaps you are ok with pollution in our country because china sucks, so environmentalists should stop cryin?

That would be ridiculous, yet you say the same thing about the wealth gap and expect us to accept it.
 
2014-02-12 10:57:46 PM

Mike_LowELL: cman: We are the ones who keep you rich. Show us some appreciation

LOL.  You think that you have anything to do with my wealth?  If I rounded up all the workers in my factories and threw them into a bottomless pit, and personally ran the factories, I could double the output of my goods.  I am not only the best businessman who has ever lived, but the best worker.  But I don't waste my time doing things that I can put poor people to work doing.  I have very important things to do.  There are people on internet message boards who are flat-out wrong, and they need to be told this.  That is why you are poor and I am a billionaire who posts on the internet, calling people out on their lies.


It's.......beautiful
 
2014-02-12 10:57:48 PM
99% of the 1% are just assholes.
 
2014-02-12 10:57:56 PM
Finally, a pro-gun argument I can support. Rather than an inefficient guillotine (in terms of mass production), we can look forward to the day when 280 million firearms start lining these entitled farks up in rows.
 
2014-02-12 10:58:10 PM

jso2897: I didn't say that either was either.


Then why did you accuse me of wanting it?
 
2014-02-12 11:00:21 PM
If no one is entitled to anything, then no one is entitled to anything. No exceptions - even for the "property right".
It's a human invention, like any other "right".
 
2014-02-12 11:00:45 PM

Shryke: Almost Everybody Poops: but greed is a flaw in us humans

Greed, as you so put it, is one of your primary evolutionary traits. You happen to enjoy an environment that is so safe and wealthy that you rarely need to concern yourself with it; however, were that bubble to pop, you would instantly revert to normal. Greed is always there. It's healthy, it's honest, and like everything else, it can be taken to far.


Exactly, which is why external forces (e.g. welfare, minimum wage, etc.) need to exist in order to balance that greed.  Specifically, in a capitalist society, wealth will flow to the top (as we've seen for the past 30 years).  Which is why it's been disgusting in the past few weeks to see billionaires lament on how they have been attacked by the left, when they've seen the vast majority of growth in wealth.
 
2014-02-12 11:00:57 PM

MayoSlather: Nutsac_Jim: MayoSlather: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: jso2897: Well, this is what I call "True Bullshiat" - technically, it's true - but in it's intended meaning, it's bullshiat.

I guess in a sense it's a somewhat poetic argument, since it means that nobody but the lowest man on the totem pole can complain about anything. Which if the 1% were logically consistent, would mean that they wouldn't complain about marginal increases to their tax rates because somebody else has it worse. Since they aren't, they compare themselves to Jews during the Holocaust, but I dream of the day on which they shut up because some kid in Ghana is eating dirt for lunch.

Well put. It's thinking that would tell a guy that comes into the emergency room with a compound fracture to stop his bellyaching because someone else has flesh eating bacteria.

Oddly enough, such an attitude will help one get through 99% of life.

How plucky of you. You sir, are my inspiration. A pristine enlightened individual in a world full of whiners.


You are right.  It's better to just wine until someone give you more of their money so you don't rob them.
 
2014-02-12 11:01:22 PM

Shryke: jso2897: I didn't say that either was either.

Then why did you accuse me of wanting it?


I didn't. You can't read English any better than you write it.
 
2014-02-12 11:01:28 PM

Shryke: Almost Everybody Poops: True, but humanity isn't a zero-sum game

wat

since humanity's flaws are greed

again: wat

underprivileged

I reject the term as loaded

I think we can manage to give to the poor enough such that they aren't as poor as in third world countries.

The poor in this country are lightyears apart from real poverty elsewhere, and you farking know it. The poor in this country make India's middle class look positively humble.


Again: our poor are only lightyears ahead because of the 'entitlement' programs that you say people aren't entitled to.

By your own words and calling out of weaver about entitlements I would think you WANT our poor to be just like the "real poverty" you speak of.

But that cannot be right. That is cartoon-level evil.
 
2014-02-12 11:02:59 PM
jso2897
Somebody needs to remind these guys about what happened to about 90% of America's great fortunes in The Depression - it wasn't just the working class and the bourgoise who took it in the rump.

Wealth stratification decreased during the great depression, but it's been increasing for the last several years.


Barnabus_Duke
People go INTO debt, it doesn't just appear from out of nowhere. Yes, sometimes shiat happens, but CHOICES people!!! Choose wisely and take some farking responsibility!!!!!!

There is no such thing as "choice" under a fundamentally coercive system.


Nemo's Brother
Only leftists with no understanding of economics or scarcity thought that way.

It's precisely the argument made by pro-globalization Neoliberals in pushing things like NAFTA and trade deals with China and other places that have no problems with child labor, sweatshops, or dumping toxic waste directly into the nearest river, and which was opposed by leftists. It is not physically possible for you to me more wrong.
 
2014-02-12 11:03:22 PM
Boring troll is boring. Goodnite, all! :D
 
2014-02-12 11:03:49 PM

jake_lex: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 850x464]


Courtesy of Mr. "Blackwhite" Stossel?
 
2014-02-12 11:04:12 PM

jso2897: Boring troll is boring. Goodnite, all! :D


o/
 
2014-02-12 11:04:16 PM
He's not wrong. Americans are wealthy as fark compared to the rest of the world. Even our people as fat as hell.
 
2014-02-12 11:05:01 PM

lostcat: This myth that poor Americans are richer than the average people in other countries has to be dispelled.

There are new millionaires popping up all over the world, in places that we like to think of as poor or developing nations. It's because the economy is shifting away from the West and towards the eastern hemisphere. People are becoming rich on real estate deals, construction, and manufacturing.

Go visit SE Asia and look at the construction projects taking place there. They can't build skyscrapers fast enough in Ho Chi Minh City.

There are still plenty of poor people all over the world, but the quality of life in the US for anyone below poverty level is getting worse. The US is expensive. Child care, health care, food and other costs are high, compared with countries like India and Thailand.

This mentality that our poor are better off than the poor in other countries is just wrong.


I get your point, but you're wrong. The level of poverty you'll see in places like India and Africa is just soul-crushing to witness. People live in conditions that would never be tolerated in the U.S., and you regularly see people with diseases that don't even exist here. I certainly don't want to trivialize the plight of impoverished Americans, but to say they're just as bad off as people in certain other countries is just plain incorrect, and if you argue otherwise, you'll just play into the hands of conservatives who want to use that reality to excuse poverty in America.

A better response is to point out that, if these mega-rich assholes lived in a place like Cuba, the government could imprison them and confiscate all their worldly belongings, so they shouldn't biatch about the absurdly low taxes they pay in the U.S. Don't let these pricks define the argument.
 
2014-02-12 11:05:26 PM

Almost Everybody Poops: Specifically, in a capitalist society, wealth will flow to the top (as we've seen for the past 30 years).


This is a highly inaccurate observation.

The entirety of the US population has enjoyed massive gains in overall lifestyle.  What Krugman and others seem to think can continue forever is the entitlement state - pensions, healthcare, etc. It can't; it never could, and never will. The model relied on laughably bad math and a post ww2 economic bubble resulting from the US possessing the old standing major industrial base on the planet.

That aside; I am not rejecting the notion of a safety net. I am rejecting what most of the left consider "minimum acceptable living conditions".
 
2014-02-12 11:07:15 PM
kitsuneymg
4) There is no forth world. By definition, everyone not in 1st or 2nd is 3rd.

uh, no, using "fourth world" to describe marginalized indigenous populations is not something he's making up.
 
2014-02-12 11:07:27 PM

Shryke: Almost Everybody Poops: True, but humanity isn't a zero-sum game

wat

since humanity's flaws are greed

again: wat

underprivileged

I reject the term as loaded

I think we can manage to give to the poor enough such that they aren't as poor as in third world countries.

The poor in this country are lightyears apart from real poverty elsewhere, and you farking know it. The poor in this country make India's middle class look positively humble.


That's not even remotely true.

The poorest in this country are homeless.  They don't even have the option of building their own shack, it's a building code violation.  They don't always have food.  Any healthcare is minimal.  The only people in the world who are worse off are dying of starvation because of a famine.
 
2014-02-12 11:08:37 PM

Shryke: Almost Everybody Poops: Specifically, in a capitalist society, wealth will flow to the top (as we've seen for the past 30 years).

This is a highly inaccurate observation.

The entirety of the US population has enjoyed massive gains in overall lifestyle.  What Krugman and others seem to think can continue forever is the entitlement state - pensions, healthcare, etc. It can't; it never could, and never will. The model relied on laughably bad math and a post ww2 economic bubble resulting from the US possessing the old standing major industrial base on the planet.

That aside; I am not rejecting the notion of a safety net. I am rejecting what most of the left consider "minimum acceptable living conditions".


Just finish whacking and cum already.

Erections lasting longer than four hours are dangerous.
 
2014-02-12 11:08:57 PM

Shryke: Smackledorfer: That was a weaselly response.

Are you farking kidding? That was as brutally honest as I could answer. You ASKED what I felt people were entitled to, I answered: NOTHING. HOW is that WEASELY?????? Asshole.

I want to see you say it: "in a world with heavy automation and no need for labor, people should starve regardless of how much food there is".

You fool. We are the most automated country there is, and yet we eradicated starvation long ago. You support the foolish notion ("buggy whip economics") that our economy should rely on physical labor. Why not advocate removing all automation? That includes all machines. Answer me that.


Yes we are such a country. And as a society, no thanks to people like you, we have decided that those not needed for labor or not needed enough to command a living wage, hare entitled to various levels of aid.

You don't get to have this both ways, insisting no one is entitled to anything and then pointing to a country with welfare programs to prove poverty isn't a concern. That is ridiculous.

As for buggy whip labor, you are way out in strawman territory. Not once have I called for a reduction in automation.
 
2014-02-12 11:09:02 PM

Smackledorfer: ur poor are only lightyears ahead because of the 'entitlement' programs that you say people aren't entitled to.


Bullshiat. Our poor are where they are because our capitalist system produces so much wealth.  To wit: there are MANY other governments out there that provide MUCH more, percentage-wise, hand-outs to their poor. Nonetheless their poor are in worse shape - and for real socialist countries outside of OPEC, they are in MUCH worse shape.

This is what continually confounds me with your side of the argument: you somehow think, despite all evidence before you, that wealth redistribution is somehow responsible for our nation's wealth. This mathematically cannot be. Yet you firmly believe it. Baffling.
 
2014-02-12 11:09:16 PM
These guys are really brave from behind the protection of their corporate mercenary armies.
 
2014-02-12 11:09:41 PM

Shryke: Almost Everybody Poops: Specifically, in a capitalist society, wealth will flow to the top (as we've seen for the past 30 years).

This is a highly inaccurate observation.

The entirety of the US population has enjoyed massive gains in overall lifestyle.  What Krugman and others seem to think can continue forever is the entitlement state - pensions, healthcare, etc. It can't; it never could, and never will. The model relied on laughably bad math and a post ww2 economic bubble resulting from the US possessing the old standing major industrial base on the planet.

That aside; I am not rejecting the notion of a safety net. I am rejecting what most of the left consider "minimum acceptable living conditions".


Well, let's ignore the fact that the median income has remained stagnant over the past 30 years and focus on this statement:

Shryke: minimum acceptable living conditions


What do you believe they should be?
 
2014-02-12 11:10:05 PM

Tio_Holtzmann: Mike_LowELL: cman: We are the ones who keep you rich. Show us some appreciation

LOL.  You think that you have anything to do with my wealth?  If I rounded up all the workers in my factories and threw them into a bottomless pit, and personally ran the factories, I could double the output of my goods.  I am not only the best businessman who has ever lived, but the best worker.  But I don't waste my time doing things that I can put poor people to work doing.  I have very important things to do.  There are people on internet message boards who are flat-out wrong, and they need to be told this.  That is why you are poor and I am a billionaire who posts on the internet, calling people out on their lies.

It's.......beautiful


Theu should have sent a poet.
 
2014-02-12 11:10:18 PM

jso2897: I didn't.


jso2897: If you want the law of the jungle - that can be arranged, but you might not have the substance to win at that game.
Be very careful what you wish for - you might get it.


Are you farking kidding?
 
2014-02-12 11:10:19 PM

Farxist Marxist: Finally, a pro-gun argument I can support. Rather than an inefficient guillotine (in terms of mass production), we can look forward to the day when 280 million firearms start lining these entitled farks up in rows.


Just remember what happens when the purges begin...
 
2014-02-12 11:10:37 PM
That Guy Jeff
He's not wrong. Americans are wealthy as fark compared to the rest of the world. Even our people as fat as hell.

is this where I get to point out that obesity correlates to poverty, because people who can't afford to eat good food or spend time and energy cooking end up eating cheap crap that kills them?


Shryke
post ww2 economic bubble resulting from the US possessing the old standing major industrial base on the planet.

Is that supposed to be "only"?
 
2014-02-12 11:11:04 PM

DarkVader: That's not even remotely true.


It's entirely true.
 
2014-02-12 11:11:40 PM

RanDomino: Is that supposed to be "only"?


Yes, pardon.
 
2014-02-12 11:11:56 PM
On the Relevancy Scale, I give myself a 3/10:

http://youtu.be/lXw-funTZwI

/good background music while reading comments tho
 
2014-02-12 11:13:10 PM
Wow, the onepercenters have been on a roll lately.  They can't pour enough salt into the wound.

I'm thinking that any day now, one of them will go just a bit too far over the top and oh, snap.

Pitchforks.  Pitchforks everywhere.
 
2014-02-12 11:13:29 PM

That Guy Jeff: He's not wrong. Americans are wealthy as fark compared to the rest of the world. Even our people as fat as hell.


If I understand correctly, the whole world is getting, including some animals, even in countries with very low exposure to the standard things we blame american tubbyness on, or animals whose environment shouldn't be making them bigger.

None of which excuses me my belly :).
 
2014-02-12 11:13:34 PM
Shryke
you somehow think, despite all evidence before you, that wealth redistribution is somehow responsible for our nation's wealth.

The New Deal, which created the middle-class, happened in the 1930s. Before the US had the old standing major industrial base on the planet. Curious.
 
2014-02-12 11:14:17 PM

Smackledorfer: we have decided that those not needed for labor


YOU HAVE A POOR DEFINITION OF LABOR. Why can't you grasp that? Shall we bring back seamstresses? Hand-washing? What else?

Not once have I called for a reduction in automation.

You are describing automation as the key factor in obsoleting our labor pool, are you not?
 
2014-02-12 11:14:52 PM

RanDomino: which created the middle-class


Hahahahahahaha, that's awesome. Tell me how.
 
2014-02-12 11:16:14 PM

Shryke: DarkVader: That's not even remotely true.

It's entirely true.


Wow.  You're an idiot.
 
2014-02-12 11:16:56 PM

Shryke: RanDomino: which created the middle-class

Hahahahahahaha, that's awesome. Tell me how.


It didn't create the middle class, but it certainly helped us get out of the Great Depression.
 
2014-02-12 11:17:01 PM

RanDomino: The New Deal, which created the middle-class,


By the way, the very notion that the government created the middle class is pure socialist bullshiat. Just wanted to add that, slick. The government doesn't create wealth. The people do.
 
2014-02-12 11:18:22 PM

DarkVader: Wow. You're an idiot.


Ouchie! Ad hom wins again!

Boring.
 
2014-02-12 11:19:55 PM

Almost Everybody Poops: It didn't create the middle class, but it certainly helped us get out of the Great Depression.


I don't agree. Moving money around on a table, or printing from nothing, does not increase wealth. It can't.
 
2014-02-12 11:21:33 PM

Shryke: Almost Everybody Poops: It didn't create the middle class, but it certainly helped us get out of the Great Depression.

I don't agree. Moving money around on a table, or printing from nothing, does not increase wealth. It can't.


It wasn't about moving money, it was about creating jobs.  Anyway, I'm going to bed, goodnight!
 
2014-02-12 11:21:43 PM
$220 for the top LOL

media.nicolemiller.com
This top is made from silk with mini mirror detail down the front and at the hem. Leave this shirt untucked for a relaxed and casual look, or tuck it in with shorts or a skirt for a more formal outfit.
IMPORTED
 
2014-02-12 11:21:45 PM

geek_mars:

If "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are inalienable rights, and the Constitution was written to form a government that would allow the people to secure their inalienable rights, then it must be asked what is needed to secure those basic rights and is it the responsibility of the government to ensure that citizens have them, or are at least able to secure them.
Life requires food, shelter, clothing (debatable, but preferable), healthcare and freedom from threats. The argument could be made that the government has a mandate to feed, clothe, house, care for and protect its citizens.



The pursuit of happiness is to mean that government provides a platform that allows people to be happy, but the government cannot make people happy obviously. And when this generation isn't as content as the last, it's time to start asking questions about the economic structures that have led us here.

Utopia is impossible, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for better, and the current structure of government and capitalism can be improved upon. To say that we've arrived at perfection and any thoughts of better are naively utopian is an excuse to settle for the status quo and is likely an argument posed by those who the current framework has worked best.

There currently a disconnect between our ability to produce and the wealth of the average man in the world. For America we can produce so much that factories don't run anywhere close to capacity and we intentionally create disposable shiat just so we can make more of it for the sole purpose of creating capital. Essentially our productive powers are not reflected in the well being of the common man.

The rich have rigged the rules so that wealth distribution is tied directly to what makes them the most money, not what is best for increasing the quality of life in the world, and that's why wealth inequality is a problem and why capitalism in its current state needs to be addressed.

Furthermore, when it comes to government it's merely become a pawn in the capitalist scheme. Legislature must be based on reason and scientific fact using life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness(and I'd say the all men are created equal part is important too) as its overriding philosophy to base this reason upon. There must be integrity and adaptability built into that decision making and a logical process for all laws passed.

This isn't unreasonable. It's not utopian, and there will still be problems, but it is step forward for us.
 
Displayed 50 of 279 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report