Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[bripat9643]

When government's power to manipulate our economic decisions, whatever that means, is revoked, what fills the power vacuum, corporations?

How could such an event transpire except through a democratic adjustment at the polls?

Private money rules government because of the power of corporations which will not vanish by reducing the level of democratic control supplied by government.

What "power" do corporations have other than to supply you with goods you want?

Corporations have the power to pre-select the candidates you vote for.

They have no such power. In reality populare candidates have the power to squeeze corporations for donations by threatening them with harmful regulations.

They use this same power to drive down wages,

They have no power to drive down wages. Politicians, on the other hand, do have that power by flooding the country with immigrants willing to work for low wages.

foreclose opportunity,

How on earth would they do that? Why would they do it if they could?

and raise prices.

It sure isn't working in the housing sector, is it?

They transfer wealth from consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs to rich execs and shareholders.

How do they accomplish this "transfer" of wealth? I'm dying to know.

 

[bripat9643]

All governments create monster monopolies or only those governments under the corrupting influence of large private fortunes?

Almost all governments, look at the Soviet Union, for example, with a small, but very rich elite. So not only the US and other capitalist countries have governments that help the very wealthy, but communist countries can be just as bad.

Every government ever conceived as served its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Only the US has to potential to change that peacefully at the ballot box.
But not by "choosing" either Democrat OR Republican.

How will it be achieved?

 

[dnsmith35]

When government's power to manipulate our economic decisions, whatever that means, is revoked, what fills the power vacuum, corporations?

How could such an event transpire except through a democratic adjustment at the polls?

Private money rules government because of the power of corporations which will not vanish by reducing the level of democratic control supplied by government.

What "power" do corporations have other than to supply you with goods you want?

Corporations have the power to pre-select the candidates you vote for.
They use this same power to drive down wages, foreclose opportunity, and raise prices. They transfer wealth from consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs to rich execs and shareholders.

BAH HUMBUG! You and your left wing propaganda exaggerate the power corporations have over elections, either through campaign contribution or with hold over them if elected. I do believe lobbying should be outlawed but I don't they control as much you believe they do.

 

[dnsmith35]

All governments create monster monopolies or only those governments under the corrupting influence of large private fortunes?

Almost all governments, look at the Soviet Union, for example, with a small, but very rich elite. So not only the US and other capitalist countries have governments that help the very wealthy, but communist countries can be just as bad.

Every government ever conceived as served its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Only the US has to potential to change that peacefully at the ballot box.
But not by "choosing" either Democrat OR Republican.

BAH HUMBUG, AGAIN. The only countries you can be sure are being effected by the rich, are those who have authoritative/dictatorial governments and the leaders get rich while the masses are poor. You exaggerate "bought" government in the US by huge amounts. Why don't you find a nice collective to live it and spare us your propaganda?

 

[dnsmith35]

What "power" do corporations have other than to supply you with goods you want?

Corporations have the power to pre-select the candidates you vote for.

They have no such power. In reality populare candidates have the power to squeeze corporations for donations by threatening them with harmful regulations.



They have no power to drive down wages. Politicians, on the other hand, do have that power by flooding the country with immigrants willing to work for low wages.



How on earth would they do that? Why would they do it if they could?

and raise prices.

It sure isn't working in the housing sector, is it?

They transfer wealth from consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs to rich execs and shareholders.

How do they accomplish this "transfer" of wealth? I'm dying to know.

He can't answer that. He is a socialist conspiracy theorist, and spreader of socialist propagandist, regurgitating crap from his left wing extremist sites.

 

[Crystalclear]

What "power" do corporations have other than to supply you with goods you want?

Corporations have the power to pre-select the candidates you vote for.

They use this same power to drive down wages, foreclose opportunity, and raise prices. They transfer wealth from consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs to rich execs and shareholders.

BAH HUMBUG! You and your left wing propaganda exaggerate the power corporations have over elections, either through campaign contribution or with hold over them if elected. I do believe lobbying should be outlawed but I don't they control as much you believe they do.

Military industrial complex doesn't have much control?

 

[georgephillip]

What "power" do corporations have other than to supply you with goods you want?

Corporations have the power to pre-select the candidates you vote for.

They have no such power. In reality populare candidates have the power to squeeze corporations for donations by threatening them with harmful regulations.



They have no power to drive down wages. Politicians, on the other hand, do have that power by flooding the country with immigrants willing to work for low wages.



How on earth would they do that? Why would they do it if they could?

and raise prices.

It sure isn't working in the housing sector, is it?

They transfer wealth from consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs to rich execs and shareholders.

How do they accomplish this "transfer" of wealth? I'm dying to know.

By bribing politicians for favorable tax and trade policies.
Now feel free to die.

 

[crisismangement]

Corporations have the power to pre-select the candidates you vote for.

They use this same power to drive down wages, foreclose opportunity, and raise prices. They transfer wealth from consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs to rich execs and shareholders.

BAH HUMBUG! You and your left wing propaganda exaggerate the power corporations have over elections, either through campaign contribution or with hold over them if elected. I do believe lobbying should be outlawed but I don't they control as much you believe they do.

Military industrial complex doesn't have much control?

Not since the end of WWII was there a military industrial complex, and even then it was subject to government demands. After the war industry went back to producing mostly consumer goods, but the government still regulates them.

 

[crisismangement]

Corporations have the power to pre-select the candidates you vote for.

They have no such power. In reality populare candidates have the power to squeeze corporations for donations by threatening them with harmful regulations.



They have no power to drive down wages. Politicians, on the other hand, do have that power by flooding the country with immigrants willing to work for low wages.



How on earth would they do that? Why would they do it if they could?



It sure isn't working in the housing sector, is it?

They transfer wealth from consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs to rich execs and shareholders.

How do they accomplish this "transfer" of wealth? I'm dying to know.

By bribing politicians for favorable tax and trade policies.

Some politicians are corrupt. Many are not. I believe that is an outlandish accusation impugning the character of our Congress.

Now feel free to die.

That was uncalled for.

 

[georgephillip]

Almost all governments, look at the Soviet Union, for example, with a small, but very rich elite. So not only the US and other capitalist countries have governments that help the very wealthy, but communist countries can be just as bad.

Every government ever conceived as served its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Only the US has to potential to change that peacefully at the ballot box.
But not by "choosing" either Democrat OR Republican.

How will it be achieved?

By selecting your House and Senate members from the list of established third parties instead of Democrat OR Republican. Those voters whose ballots don't contain third party candidates for congress would vote against all incumbents. FLUSH dozens or hundreds of incumbents from DC in a single news cycle and fire the second shot heard 'round the world.

 

[dnsmith35]

Every government ever conceived as served its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Only the US has to potential to change that peacefully at the ballot box.
But not by "choosing" either Democrat OR Republican.

How will it be achieved?

By selecting your House and Senate members from the list of established third parties instead of Democrat OR Republican. Those voters whose ballots don't contain third party candidates for congress would vote against all incumbents. FLUSH dozens or hundreds of incumbents from DC in a single news cycle and fire the second shot heard 'round the world.

Do you really believe that independent candidates are any more immune to corruption than Jackasses or Elephants?

If you really want to elect good Senators or Presidents we need to revert to the original method, that being MAKE ELECTIONS LOCAL AGAIN. We are more likely to know the crooks within our small congressional district than from the entire state and definitely on a national level. State legislatures are capable of appointing senators and electors for the electoral college than voters are based on more intimate knowledge of the candidates, especially on a national level.

 

[dnsmith35]

As anyone with a brain can determine, the top .01% is the super high income earners, but not from wages, from stock value. I believe that people who complain about how much they make refuse to understand that their investments put money into the hands of job creators.

The graph above shows us in concrete understanding, that the people who invest the most in America get the highest returns. That being the case it is essential that the nay sayer's recognize that even with the top 50% paying all the federal income taxes, it is the top tier which creates more jobs through their investment. I do believe the rich should pay more taxes than the less wealth, but I also recognize that every $$$ taken from the rich is lost to investment.

 

[dnsmith35]

The link below from the BLS tells us who actually earns minimum wage.

Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2012

Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented only about one-fifth of hourly paid workers, they made up about half of those paid the Federal minimum wage or less. Among employed teenagers paid by the hour, about 21 percent earned the minimum wage or less, compared with about 3 percent of workers age 25 and over. (those paid less are persons who work for tips in addition to their wage.)

Among hourly paid workers age 16 and over, about 10 percent of those who had less than a high school diploma earned the federal minimum wage or less, compared with about 4 percent of those who had a high school diploma (with no college)

The industry with the highest proportion of workers with hourly wages at or below the federal minimum wage was leisure and hospitality (about 19 percent). About half of all workers paid at or below the federal minimum wage were employed in this industry, the vast majority in restaurants and other food services. For many of these workers, tips and commissions supplement the hourly wages received.​

Based on the BLS statistics and the general consensus of economic studies, people who earn the minimum wage tend not to have sufficient skills and/or education to perform at a higher level.

 

[dnsmith35]

Harvard’s Lawrence Katz has calculated that even if all the gains of the top 1% were redistributed to the 99%, household incomes would go up by less than half of what they would if everyone had a college degree. In other words, the financial rewards of higher education are a big contributor to the income gap.

 

[dnsmith35]

Looks like G.P. has finally realize he was wrong the whole time.