Define the 1% left wingers

[BULLDOG]

View attachment 176282

Typical. You've got nothing, so you post a silly picture. Good work Mikey.

 

[Winston]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

The answer is pretty surprising. I would say a net worth north of ten million. A pretty conservative number since it comes from a study done ten years ago that pegged the number at 8.4 million dollars. So quite honestly, the top one percent is a bit inflated. 8.4 million is chump change when it comes to the real movers and shakers. The real "target" of the movement is the top one hundredth of one percent. For membership in that club I have always used "a unit". You won't find it on Google. But in the "jetset" crowd they throw around "200 million dollars" so nonchalantly that they call that sum a "unit". And if your net worth is just one of them, well you might as well be one of the bartenders at the club when it comes to attempt to run with the big dogs. These people earn a unit a year. A little over 1500 families.

So that's the line, yearly income more than two hundred million. That is the bourgeoisie in a Marxist observation. These are the people that own the majority of the wealth and control most of the means of production.

 

[boedicca]

So Soros for the democrats bad other rich folks for the GOP good. Yeah that makes sense..

Without Soros there would be no democrat party.

Without the Koch bros you’d have no gop.

So which is worse and why?

Yin and Yang .

Since Soros is 1% , why is he a Democrat?

This is where you loons pin the bogometer. To be 1% is to make $400K+. Someone who makes $400K is not remotely similar to George Soros in terms of wealth or lifestyle. The truly wealthy are the .01%.

 

[Moonglow]

So Soros for the democrats bad other rich folks for the GOP good. Yeah that makes sense..

Without Soros there would be no democrat party.

in yer wet wild dreams maybe..

 

[miketx]

View attachment 176282

Lol! Says the guy defending the poor down trodden 1%. They are so powerless after all.

I'm not defending anyone liar, I'm just pointing out where insects like you get fed.

 

[Votto]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

The answer is pretty surprising. I would say a net worth north of ten million. A pretty conservative number since it comes from a study done ten years ago that pegged the number at 8.4 million dollars. So quite honestly, the top one percent is a bit inflated. 8.4 million is chump change when it comes to the real movers and shakers. The real "target" of the movement is the top one hundredth of one percent. For membership in that club I have always used "a unit". You won't find it on Google. But in the "jetset" crowd they throw around "200 million dollars" so nonchalantly that they call that sum a "unit". And if your net worth is just one of them, well you might as well be one of the bartenders at the club when it comes to attempt to run with the big dogs. These people earn a unit a year. A little over 1500 families.

So that's the line, yearly income more than two hundred million. That is the bourgeoisie in a Marxist observation. These are the people that own the majority of the wealth and control most of the means of production.

Why draw the line at $8.4 million? If you lower that mark then the 1% becomes 2%. If you lower it even further the 2% becomes 3%, etc.

 

[Votto]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

It is not delineated by dollars. Shouldn't someone who has so much to say about the evils of Marxism already know this?

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed – a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce.
Communist Manifesto (Chapter 1)

What about those working just to have health insurance? What about those who are working just to afford a car? What about those working just to supplement their income but they don't really need to, etc.?

 

[Seawytch]

Easy answer....they are the folks that own 40% of the nation's wealth.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-in-the-past-50-years/?utm_term=.e01daecd441a

 

[Tehon]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

It is not delineated by dollars. Shouldn't someone who has so much to say about the evils of Marxism already know this?

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed – a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce.
Communist Manifesto (Chapter 1)

What about those working just to have health insurance? What about those who are working just to afford a car? What about those working just to supplement their income but they don't really need to, etc.?

Do they sell their labor as if it is a commodity? If yes then they are of the proletariat.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

So Soros for the democrats bad other rich folks for the GOP good. Yeah that makes sense..

Soros hedges against America and makes profits, Businesses, large and small, invest in America. Yeah, that should make sense yet you people think those that those who seek profit and create jobs is evil yet you defend one who bets against America and creates no jobs.

Bootlicking Familiars

Saying that the rich create jobs is like saying that vampires create blood.

 

[LeftofLeft]

So Soros for the democrats bad other rich folks for the GOP good. Yeah that makes sense..

Soros hedges against America and makes profits, Businesses, large and small, invest in America. Yeah, that should make sense yet you people think those that those who seek profit and create jobs is evil yet you defend one who bets against America and creates no jobs.

Bootlicking Familiars

Saying that the rich create jobs is like saying that vampires create blood.

Do the poor create jobs? But, go back and review my post. You moved the goal post. I was touting businesses; not necessarily the rich.

 

[bendog]

So Soros for the democrats bad other rich folks for the GOP good. Yeah that makes sense..

Without Soros there would be no democrat party.

Without the Koch bros you’d have no gop.

So which is worse and why?

That is like asking which is worse, syphilis or gonorrhea


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No the OP is nonsensical. Relatively few democrats demonize the 1% for their wealth, and the gop typically doesn't demonize people who lack the God given ability to make a living, or who are children.

The questions arise when govt passes laws that treat the 1% in some way, and/or treat other income/wealth groups in some way. For example, if the GOP's purpose for the tax cut was to stimulate the economy with monetary stimulus, putting 80% of the stimulus to a group that they knew wouldn't spend most of it was either stupid or the gop lied about the reason for the tax cut. Esp considering they also cut taxes on corporations that the 1% owns most of the equity interest .

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Easy answer....they are the folks that own 40% of the nation's wealth.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-in-the-past-50-years/?utm_term=.e01daecd441a

Ideal slices of the pie?
Who the fuck is wapo to make that call.

 

[hazlnut]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

Not you.

Take the current population of the U.S. and multiply by .01 (mind the decimal point sweetie)

Having money doesn't make one evil...

And being a citizen doesn't make one righteous....

 

[boedicca]

View attachment 176282

Typical. You've got nothing, so you post a silly picture. Good work Mikey.

Oops...I guess you're taking a time out to indulge in your favorite hobby.


7262 by boedicca on US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[boedicca]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

It is not delineated by dollars. Shouldn't someone who has so much to say about the evils of Marxism already know this?

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed – a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce.
Communist Manifesto (Chapter 1)

What about those working just to have health insurance? What about those who are working just to afford a car? What about those working just to supplement their income but they don't really need to, etc.?

Do they sell their labor as if it is a commodity? If yes then they are of the proletariat.

If they sell their time, then they are paid for their work.

Why does that chap your hide?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Wife and I fall at around the 3.9% level and we're paying more next year.
We're however being compensated by stock gains that far exceed our losses so I'm good with the Trumps tax plan and the Trump economy.

This should be a perfect balance for liberals...we pay more in taxes and we'll make more money that will be put back into the economy creating jobs.

I'd like to hear a liberals take on my situation and whether it's fair or not?

 

[Tehon]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

It is not delineated by dollars. Shouldn't someone who has so much to say about the evils of Marxism already know this?

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed – a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce.
Communist Manifesto (Chapter 1)

What about those working just to have health insurance? What about those who are working just to afford a car? What about those working just to supplement their income but they don't really need to, etc.?

Do they sell their labor as if it is a commodity? If yes then they are of the proletariat.

If they sell their time, then they are paid for their work.

Why does that chap your hide?

I was just responding to a question. Did I come across as being upset?

 

[boedicca]

I've often wondered where the line is drawn between the righteous citizen and the evil 1%?

At what monetary value does one become the 1%?

For the Marxist, at what monetary value does the proletariat end and the bourgeoisie begin?

And where does George Soros fit in all this?

It is not delineated by dollars. Shouldn't someone who has so much to say about the evils of Marxism already know this?

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed – a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce.
Communist Manifesto (Chapter 1)

What about those working just to have health insurance? What about those who are working just to afford a car? What about those working just to supplement their income but they don't really need to, etc.?

Do they sell their labor as if it is a commodity? If yes then they are of the proletariat.

If they sell their time, then they are paid for their work.

Why does that chap your hide?

I was just responding to a question. Did I come across as being upset?

Anyone who quotes the Communist Manifesto as a credible resource comes off as a rather unhinged at a minimum.

 

[Tehon]

It is not delineated by dollars. Shouldn't someone who has so much to say about the evils of Marxism already know this?

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed – a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce.
Communist Manifesto (Chapter 1)

What about those working just to have health insurance? What about those who are working just to afford a car? What about those working just to supplement their income but they don't really need to, etc.?

Do they sell their labor as if it is a commodity? If yes then they are of the proletariat.

If they sell their time, then they are paid for their work.

Why does that chap your hide?

I was just responding to a question. Did I come across as being upset?

Anyone who quotes the Communist Manifesto as a credible resource comes off as a rather unhinged at a minimum.

My signature? It's a quote from The German Ideology
I guess I'm good then.