Bernie Sanders says he wants to "redistribute wealth". But what does that really mean?

[rightwinger]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

 

[Skull Pilot]

If y'all can explain why there are mega-corporations that pay little or no taxes, while you the middle class pay your fair share, it will all become clear to you.

If you're too ignorant to understand the premise, just keep making stupid statements.

You do realize that almost half of people who have an income pay ZERO income tax don't you?

So I would not call the 53% who do the "middle class" in fact at least one third of the "middle class" is paying no income tax at all and another third pays a net tax of less than 10%

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bernie is a classic live in mom's basement economic illiterate.

what wealth? does Bernie actually believe that there are 100 billionaires in all of 57 states?

To Bernie anyone with a job and a savings account is rich

 

[Skull Pilot]

You republicans have been redistributing nearly all the wealth to the top 1% for the past 40 years. You don't like it when someone calls you on it!

Bullshit

How much of your money was ever taken from you and given to a rich guy?

 

[peach174]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

 

[rightwinger]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

 

[peach174]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

Very weak growth.
When the wealthy sits on their wealth during depressions and recessions, yes they get wealthier because they are not investing and spending.

 

[Skull Pilot]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

Very weak growth.
When the wealthy sits on their wealth during depressions and recessions, yes they get wealthier because they are not investing and spending.

The term anemic comes to mind

And the rich got richer under Obama because of his quantitative easing (printing a shit load of money) and the fed artificially holding down interest rates so the people with money borrowed more money at near 0% interest and put it all in the market which is why it did so well

 

[rightwinger]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

Very weak growth.
When the wealthy sits on their wealth during depressions and recessions, yes they get wealthier because they are not investing and spending.

$35 trillion in additional wealth since 2009

Guess where it ended up?

 

[peach174]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

Very weak growth.
When the wealthy sits on their wealth during depressions and recessions, yes they get wealthier because they are not investing and spending.

The term anemic comes to mind


And the rich got richer under Obama because of his quantitative easing (printing a shit load of money) and the fed artificially holding down interest rates so the people with money borrowed more money at near 0% interest and put it all in the market which is why it did so well

Then he blames the rich and republicans for making the rich richer.
Priceless !!!!!!!!!!!

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

You republicans have been redistributing nearly all the wealth to the top 1% for the past 40 years. You don't like it when someone calls you on it!

It's the Democrats that have done that.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

Very weak growth.
When the wealthy sits on their wealth during depressions and recessions, yes they get wealthier because they are not investing and spending.

$35 trillion in additional wealth since 2009

Guess where it ended up?

Whose been in charge since 2009?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Looks like the thread has been hijacked as usual, into "It's Republicans fault!" and "It's Democrats fault!".

Back to the subject:

Bernie Sanders says he wants to "redistribute wealth". But what does that really mean?

This is the latest installation of liberals and other socialists saying they want to "redistribute" the wealth in this country. But that implies that the wealth was "distributed" by someone to us all in the first place, and maybe that someone did a bad job and the liberal socialists think they can do it better.

But wealth was never "distributed" to any of us, except maybe by welfare clerks to various indigent persons. But the $100 that's in my wallet now, wasn't distributed to me by anyone. A guy with a car and I made an agreement: I'd tune up his car and fix a few things on it, and he'd pay me $100 to do it. I tuned it up, changed the oil, and replaced two squeaking belts that were badly worn. He's happy, now it starts easier, gets better gas mileage, and doesn't make weird sounds as he drives. He'd much rather have a car that drives like this, than have the $100; and I'd much rather have the $100 and don't mind getting my hands dirty to do something I do well.

Nobody "distributed" anything to either one of us. He and I made a deal, both of us gave the other something of value, both of us are happy with the outcome.

But if our modern liberal socialists had come along just then, they might have taken the guy's $100, and the guy couldn't have gotten me to fix his car. He'd still have a sh*tty-running car that sometimes wouldn't start, I'd be $100 poorer... which means my son would be walking 3 miles to school instead of riding the bike I was about to fix up for him. The liberal socialists want me to think that a better use was made of that $100, than we would have made of it... but when we asked them exactly what the money was used for, they can't answer the question.

People who talk about "redistributing" wealth, are lying. What they are doing, is taking something that was yours, that you earned, and telling you that (a) they know better how to use it than you do, and (b) this somehow makes it OK for them to take it from you, whether you like it or not.

These people aren't "redistributing" anything, because your money wasn't "distributed" to you in the first place. You EARNED it, and you got it because you DESERVED it, not because some uninvolved bureaucrat thought your having it would somehow be a good idea and so gave his blessing on you to receive it.

"Redistributing" is the liberal socialists' way of implying you did NOT earn your money, and so it's not really yours. And pretending that his deciding what to use your money for, is the natural order of things. Not the idea that since you earned it, YOU should decide what to use it for. They're trying to get you away from that idea.

A man who jerks you into an alley, sticks a gun in your face, and demands you give him your money or he'll blast you, is doing the same thing those liberal socialists are. The only difference is, the guy with the gun is being more honest and straightforward about it. He's not pretending you owe him anything, and not trying to get you to believe that what he's doing is "moral", and not trying to fool you into thinking that your keeping your money is eeevil.

Next time one of our liberal socialists tells you he wants to "redistribute" the wealth, remember what he's really saying. And remember that in many ways you'd be better off with somebody sticking a gun in your face.

----------------------------------------------

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Oct. 20, 2015

In an interview with Felix Salmon of Fusion, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders explains how he would redistribute wealth back to the middle class. However, Sanders said it's "a little more complicated" than just taking wealth from the rich and redistributing it to the middle class. Sanders also proposed a wealth tax to help pay for his economic agenda.

"I think what’s happened is that there has been mass redistribution of wealth in this country for the last 30 years," Sanders said. "The problem is it’s gone from the middle class to the top one-tenth of 1%. And I think we have to redistribute it back to working families and the middle class so that they can have a decent standard of living."[/QUOTE]

 

[dblack]

Looks like the thread has been hijacked as usual, into "It's Republicans fault!" and "It's Democrats fault!".

Back to the subject:

Bernie Sanders says he wants to "redistribute wealth". But what does that really mean?

This is the latest installation of liberals and other socialists saying they want to "redistribute" the wealth in this country. But that implies that the wealth was "distributed" by someone to us all in the first place, and maybe that someone did a bad job and the liberal socialists think they can do it better.

But wealth was never "distributed" to any of us, except maybe by welfare clerks to various indigent persons. But the $100 that's in my wallet now, wasn't distributed to me by anyone. A guy with a car and I made an agreement: I'd tune up his car and fix a few things on it, and he'd pay me $100 to do it. I tuned it up, changed the oil, and replaced two squeaking belts that were badly worn. He's happy, now it starts easier, gets better gas mileage, and doesn't make weird sounds as he drives. He'd much rather have a car that drives like this, than have the $100; and I'd much rather have the $100 and don't mind getting my hands dirty to do something I do well.

Nobody "distributed" anything to either one of us. He and I made a deal, both of us gave the other something of value, both of us are happy with the outcome.

But if our modern liberal socialists had come along just then, they might have taken the guy's $100, and the guy couldn't have gotten me to fix his car. He'd still have a sh*tty-running car that sometimes wouldn't start, I'd be $100 poorer... which means my son would be walking 3 miles to school instead of riding the bike I was about to fix up for him. The liberal socialists want me to think that a better use was made of that $100, than we would have made of it... but when we asked them exactly what the money was used for, they can't answer the question.

People who talk about "redistributing" wealth, are lying. What they are doing, is taking something that was yours, that you earned, and telling you that (a) they know better how to use it than you do, and (b) this somehow makes it OK for them to take it from you, whether you like it or not.

These people aren't "redistributing" anything, because your money wasn't "distributed" to you in the first place. You EARNED it, and you got it because you DESERVED it, not because some uninvolved bureaucrat thought your having it would somehow be a good idea and so gave his blessing on you to receive it.

"Redistributing" is the liberal socialists' way of implying you did NOT earn your money, and so it's not really yours. And pretending that his deciding what to use your money for, is the natural order of things. Not the idea that since you earned it, YOU should decide what to use it for. They're trying to get you away from that idea.

A man who jerks you into an alley, sticks a gun in your face, and demands you give him your money or he'll blast you, is doing the same thing those liberal socialists are. The only difference is, the guy with the gun is being more honest and straightforward about it. He's not pretending you owe him anything, and not trying to get you to believe that what he's doing is "moral", and not trying to fool you into thinking that your keeping your money is eeevil.

Next time one of our liberal socialists tells you he wants to "redistribute" the wealth, remember what he's really saying. And remember that in many ways you'd be better off with somebody sticking a gun in your face.

----------------------------------------------

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Oct. 20, 2015

In an interview with Felix Salmon of Fusion, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders explains how he would redistribute wealth back to the middle class. However, Sanders said it's "a little more complicated" than just taking wealth from the rich and redistributing it to the middle class. Sanders also proposed a wealth tax to help pay for his economic agenda.

"I think what’s happened is that there has been mass redistribution of wealth in this country for the last 30 years," Sanders said. "The problem is it’s gone from the middle class to the top one-tenth of 1%. And I think we have to redistribute it back to working families and the middle class so that they can have a decent standard of living."

I actually see it differently. In a free market, wealth IS distributed, and is constantly being distributed, by the decisions of millions of individual consumers and investors. When Bernie says government should redistribute wealth, he's essentially saying "you're not doing it right" to the American public.

 

[rightwinger]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

Very weak growth.
When the wealthy sits on their wealth during depressions and recessions, yes they get wealthier because they are not investing and spending.

$35 trillion in additional wealth since 2009

Guess where it ended up?

Whose been in charge since 2009?

Another fan of redistribution of wealth!

Go Bernie!

 

[rightwinger]

Looks like the thread has been hijacked as usual, into "It's Republicans fault!" and "It's Democrats fault!".

Back to the subject:

Bernie Sanders says he wants to "redistribute wealth". But what does that really mean?

This is the latest installation of liberals and other socialists saying they want to "redistribute" the wealth in this country. But that implies that the wealth was "distributed" by someone to us all in the first place, and maybe that someone did a bad job and the liberal socialists think they can do it better.

But wealth was never "distributed" to any of us, except maybe by welfare clerks to various indigent persons. But the $100 that's in my wallet now, wasn't distributed to me by anyone. A guy with a car and I made an agreement: I'd tune up his car and fix a few things on it, and he'd pay me $100 to do it. I tuned it up, changed the oil, and replaced two squeaking belts that were badly worn. He's happy, now it starts easier, gets better gas mileage, and doesn't make weird sounds as he drives. He'd much rather have a car that drives like this, than have the $100; and I'd much rather have the $100 and don't mind getting my hands dirty to do something I do well.

Nobody "distributed" anything to either one of us. He and I made a deal, both of us gave the other something of value, both of us are happy with the outcome.

But if our modern liberal socialists had come along just then, they might have taken the guy's $100, and the guy couldn't have gotten me to fix his car. He'd still have a sh*tty-running car that sometimes wouldn't start, I'd be $100 poorer... which means my son would be walking 3 miles to school instead of riding the bike I was about to fix up for him. The liberal socialists want me to think that a better use was made of that $100, than we would have made of it... but when we asked them exactly what the money was used for, they can't answer the question.

People who talk about "redistributing" wealth, are lying. What they are doing, is taking something that was yours, that you earned, and telling you that (a) they know better how to use it than you do, and (b) this somehow makes it OK for them to take it from you, whether you like it or not.

These people aren't "redistributing" anything, because your money wasn't "distributed" to you in the first place. You EARNED it, and you got it because you DESERVED it, not because some uninvolved bureaucrat thought your having it would somehow be a good idea and so gave his blessing on you to receive it.

"Redistributing" is the liberal socialists' way of implying you did NOT earn your money, and so it's not really yours. And pretending that his deciding what to use your money for, is the natural order of things. Not the idea that since you earned it, YOU should decide what to use it for. They're trying to get you away from that idea.

A man who jerks you into an alley, sticks a gun in your face, and demands you give him your money or he'll blast you, is doing the same thing those liberal socialists are. The only difference is, the guy with the gun is being more honest and straightforward about it. He's not pretending you owe him anything, and not trying to get you to believe that what he's doing is "moral", and not trying to fool you into thinking that your keeping your money is eeevil.

Next time one of our liberal socialists tells you he wants to "redistribute" the wealth, remember what he's really saying. And remember that in many ways you'd be better off with somebody sticking a gun in your face.

----------------------------------------------

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Oct. 20, 2015

In an interview with Felix Salmon of Fusion, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders explains how he would redistribute wealth back to the middle class. However, Sanders said it's "a little more complicated" than just taking wealth from the rich and redistributing it to the middle class. Sanders also proposed a wealth tax to help pay for his economic agenda.

"I think what’s happened is that there has been mass redistribution of wealth in this country for the last 30 years," Sanders said. "The problem is it’s gone from the middle class to the top one-tenth of 1%. And I think we have to redistribute it back to working families and the middle class so that they can have a decent standard of living."

I actually see it differently. In a free market, wealth IS distributed, and is constantly being distributed, by the decisions of millions of individual consumers and investors. When Bernie says government should redistribute wealth, he's essentially saying "you're not doing it right" to the American public.

Actually, Bernie is saying the Government shouldn't continue polices that only enrich the wealthy

Agree?

 

[dblack]

Looks like the thread has been hijacked as usual, into "It's Republicans fault!" and "It's Democrats fault!".

Back to the subject:

Bernie Sanders says he wants to "redistribute wealth". But what does that really mean?

This is the latest installation of liberals and other socialists saying they want to "redistribute" the wealth in this country. But that implies that the wealth was "distributed" by someone to us all in the first place, and maybe that someone did a bad job and the liberal socialists think they can do it better.

But wealth was never "distributed" to any of us, except maybe by welfare clerks to various indigent persons. But the $100 that's in my wallet now, wasn't distributed to me by anyone. A guy with a car and I made an agreement: I'd tune up his car and fix a few things on it, and he'd pay me $100 to do it. I tuned it up, changed the oil, and replaced two squeaking belts that were badly worn. He's happy, now it starts easier, gets better gas mileage, and doesn't make weird sounds as he drives. He'd much rather have a car that drives like this, than have the $100; and I'd much rather have the $100 and don't mind getting my hands dirty to do something I do well.

Nobody "distributed" anything to either one of us. He and I made a deal, both of us gave the other something of value, both of us are happy with the outcome.

But if our modern liberal socialists had come along just then, they might have taken the guy's $100, and the guy couldn't have gotten me to fix his car. He'd still have a sh*tty-running car that sometimes wouldn't start, I'd be $100 poorer... which means my son would be walking 3 miles to school instead of riding the bike I was about to fix up for him. The liberal socialists want me to think that a better use was made of that $100, than we would have made of it... but when we asked them exactly what the money was used for, they can't answer the question.

People who talk about "redistributing" wealth, are lying. What they are doing, is taking something that was yours, that you earned, and telling you that (a) they know better how to use it than you do, and (b) this somehow makes it OK for them to take it from you, whether you like it or not.

These people aren't "redistributing" anything, because your money wasn't "distributed" to you in the first place. You EARNED it, and you got it because you DESERVED it, not because some uninvolved bureaucrat thought your having it would somehow be a good idea and so gave his blessing on you to receive it.

"Redistributing" is the liberal socialists' way of implying you did NOT earn your money, and so it's not really yours. And pretending that his deciding what to use your money for, is the natural order of things. Not the idea that since you earned it, YOU should decide what to use it for. They're trying to get you away from that idea.

A man who jerks you into an alley, sticks a gun in your face, and demands you give him your money or he'll blast you, is doing the same thing those liberal socialists are. The only difference is, the guy with the gun is being more honest and straightforward about it. He's not pretending you owe him anything, and not trying to get you to believe that what he's doing is "moral", and not trying to fool you into thinking that your keeping your money is eeevil.

Next time one of our liberal socialists tells you he wants to "redistribute" the wealth, remember what he's really saying. And remember that in many ways you'd be better off with somebody sticking a gun in your face.

----------------------------------------------

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Bernie Sanders: A "Little More Complicated" Than Just Taking Wealth From The Rich And Redistributing It

Oct. 20, 2015

In an interview with Felix Salmon of Fusion, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders explains how he would redistribute wealth back to the middle class. However, Sanders said it's "a little more complicated" than just taking wealth from the rich and redistributing it to the middle class. Sanders also proposed a wealth tax to help pay for his economic agenda.

"I think what’s happened is that there has been mass redistribution of wealth in this country for the last 30 years," Sanders said. "The problem is it’s gone from the middle class to the top one-tenth of 1%. And I think we have to redistribute it back to working families and the middle class so that they can have a decent standard of living."

I actually see it differently. In a free market, wealth IS distributed, and is constantly being distributed, by the decisions of millions of individual consumers and investors. When Bernie says government should redistribute wealth, he's essentially saying "you're not doing it right" to the American public.

Actually, Bernie is saying the Government shouldn't continue polices that only enrich the wealthy

Agree?

I do! And if those advocating "redistribution" simply focused on getting rid of rules that skew the market's distribution of wealth, rather pursuing speculative remedial 'bandaids', they'd find ready allies among libertarians.

 

[RDD_1210]

He says he wants to "redistribute wealth".
It's remarkable how little difference there is between the ideas and motivations of people who say they want to "redistribute wealth", and those of a mugger who holds you up at gunpoint and steals your wallet.
Both want your money. Both think it's OK for them to take it even if you would rather keep it. Both have no legal foundation for their actions.

I'll assume you're not rich, which means what Sanders wants to do will benefit YOU.

Of course. When you rob Peter to pay Paul, that always benefits Paul.

Does that mean it's OK for the government to rob Peter?

I thought the purpose of government was to protect Peter from getting robbed. (and Paul too.) When did that change?

Taxation isn't robbery. It's in the constitution even. You know, that document you pretend to love so much.

 

[rightwinger]

How should we redistribute the wealth?

Raise taxes to 50% on income over $1 million
Tax capital gains and earned income the same
Put a half% tax on all stock transactions
Eliminate the cap on Social Security contributions

Use added revenue to:
Subsidize healthcare for working Americans
Provide free community college and internet courses
Raise minimum wage

 

[RDD_1210]

How do we redistribute wealth?

First off, we end the supply side measures we have been using for 30 years. They did not result in more jobs and nothing trickled down. Return upper tax rates to 1980 levels

Second....empower the middle class. Subsidize healthcare and education to levels they were at 30 years ago

To empower the middle class we need growth & jobs.
The more taxes on the wealthy is why they move.
When that happens the less the government gets in revenue.
France did this and they lost a lot of taxes because of that same liberal ideological move.

It is also not true that they don't pay their taxes. They do.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes

We have had economic growth.......more jobs and higher wages were not a result
More wealth for the 1 percent was

Very weak growth.
When the wealthy sits on their wealth during depressions and recessions, yes they get wealthier because they are not investing and spending.

LOL you think the rich get richer by doing nothing?

I'd love to know where you learned about economics.