Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Idk, if you wiped it out and started with a clean slate, doubt if the walton kids or koch brothers or the Rothchilds would be worth more than 100 grand for example. Old money is name and inherritence (spl?) only.
IDK if everyone that creates wealth (old money) passes the skill down to their children but more than likely they do. Its a mindset that usually is preached in the household. For instance, wealthy people tell their children to go to college to network and learn how to buy companies. Everyone else tells their children to go so they can get a "good job" and work to make others wealthy.
Partly because these children do not have the capacity to benefit from the kind of networking the children of the "rich" do. Those children have to be acceptable as a friend and associate. They aren't. They aren't raised that way.
Why can immigrants do it? They come here with zip and become wealthy or at least very well off. I can name a dozen that I've known personally that have done it. Rich people have a drive that isn't universally shared. They don't retire, ever, they take very few vacations. Their children are taken to work as soon as they can walk and talk.
Whats the point in buying in bulk whe 25% of it gets thrown out anyways~A freezer compartment is not a standard sized freezer and that is what was quoted.
I would think we would have a mandate that the folks receiving money for food in the form of welfare assistance have passed a test showing they know how to spend their food budget wisely and have the means for doing so. For example, they should have the means to store enough food to cook meals for their family for say a week. If they don't have access to a freezer and a means to heat food i would argue they don't have a means to spend our welfare $ wisely, thus I would argue money would be better spent for a food line for that person till they can show they have the basic rudimentary means to do spend money for food wisely.
“American families throw out approximately 25% of the food and beverages they buy,” the report says. It cites several reasons, including that food has been so cheap and plentiful in the United States that Americans don’t value it properly.
40% of U.S. food wasted, report says ? This Just In - CNN.com Blogs
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
I love how none of you are addressing any of the specific information in the video. You just give cheap generalizations about the nature of capitalism. Again, I favor capitalism. I just don't support the the specific kind of system we have in this country. I agree that if a person works hard, they should earn a good living. That philosophy is what makes capitalism such a successful system. However, it is not simple. Sometimes the system goes wrong. Sometimes the system is unfair.
Here are some indisputable facts on poverty in the US:
The average gross monthly income of a household receiving SNAP is $744.00. The average individual SNAP recipient receives $133.00 a month (1.50 a meal).
15% of the US population (or 46.2 million people) live in poverty.
Feedingamerica.org
(All their stats are taken directly from government data)
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
I love how none of you are addressing any of the specific information in the video. You just give cheap generalizations about the nature of capitalism. Again, I favor capitalism. I just don't support the the specific kind of system we have in this country. I agree that if a person works hard, they should earn a good living. That philosophy is what makes capitalism such a successful system. However, it is not simple. Sometimes the system goes wrong. Sometimes the system is unfair.
Here are some indisputable facts on poverty in the US:
The average gross monthly income of a household receiving SNAP is $744.00. The average individual SNAP recipient receives $133.00 a month (1.50 a meal).
15% of the US population (or 46.2 million people) live in poverty.
Feedingamerica.org
(All their stats are taken directly from government data)
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
15% of the US population (or 46.2 million people) live in poverty.
IIRC, poverty stats don't include government benefits.
So, the poverty line stats after benefits are paid are exactly what they were before. Weird.
And they only include income, so you can own a paid off house worth millions, but if your income is $12,000, for instance, still be considered under the poverty line.
IIRC, poverty stats don't include government benefits.
So, the poverty line stats after benefits are paid are exactly what they were before. Weird.
And they only include income, so you can own a paid off house worth millions, but if your income is $12,000, for instance, still be considered under the poverty line.
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
because one has nothing to do with the other. And your not so subtle hints that it is not FAIR ( LOL) implies something needs to be done to make it fair.
redistribution much?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I44SjqBZbiE]That Was the GDR - A History of the Other Germany 4 of 7 - For the People's Welfare - YouTube[/ame]This video is not true as of the year 2008 & later.
George Dubya had already fucked the upper 10% out of our money before he left office in the housing market crash. (Margin Call)
Then here comes Obama with his bailouts to the Wealthy People's banks, thus letting us know we are his bitch.
As the Wealthy no longer have any liquid cash, we only have good credit to get government loans as the American Federal Government has hidden all the liquid cash deep within their dummy corporations.
Eventually our credit lines will run out as we are unable to earn a profit the way things are now.
When our credit lines run out, we wealthy people will be unable to take more loans to make our minimum payments, our government loans will be called in, and when we CAN'T pay them, the government doesn't just put a tincy-tiny blemish on our credit report .......... NO ........ on a 2 billion dollar credit line they send a HIT SQUAD of Federal Agents to do the following:
1. They fly a helicopter to where you are.
2. They place you under arrest.
3. The wealthy person boards the helicopter with the Federal Agents.
4. The Federal Agents then ask the wealthy person "where's the money"
5. The wealthy person says "I don't have anything, I'm broke"
6. The Federal Agents then ask "do you have the means to pay your debt"
7. The wealthy person says "Um ....... No"
8. The Federal Agents then through the wealthy person out of the helicopter and he falls to his death.
This is why we need to take away the guns, get the sheeple moved to the FEMA camps and working in the GULAG's before November of THIS YEAR or the wealthy are dead, the wealthy people's families will become normal everyday sheeple and WORK & go to public schools.
So please ......... just hurry up and give up the guns.
IIRC, poverty stats don't include government benefits.
So, the poverty line stats after benefits are paid are exactly what they were before. Weird.
And they only include income, so you can own a paid off house worth millions, but if your income is $12,000, for instance, still be considered under the poverty line.
Hmm, so what exactly are the stats on people with poverty level income paying off extravagant expenses?
Oh, that's right. You don't know. You are making baseless assumptions.
no you can't. we won't let youYeah, you're right. Redistribution much. We can redistribute "much" and still have a successful capitalist society where the wealthy can still have plenty of excess and the poor can live more comfortably.
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
Jealous? You have the same right to prosper as anyone else, but the moment you start forcing your way to prosperity, then it no longer becomes prosperity but class warfare. You start vilifying the prosperous because they are what they are. But what becomes of you when you become prosperous?
"Nobody here is suggesting socialism"? Come on man, you can't honestly sit there and lie through your teeth like that. See that statement in bold? Yes, that is one of the most basic aspects of socialism. You can never in a million years force your way to prosperity.
IIRC, poverty stats don't include government benefits.
So, the poverty line stats after benefits are paid are exactly what they were before. Weird.
And they only include income, so you can own a paid off house worth millions, but if your income is $12,000, for instance, still be considered under the poverty line.
Hmm, so what exactly are the stats on people with poverty level income paying off extravagant expenses?
Oh, that's right. You don't know. You are making baseless assumptions.
oh, really assumptions? how about this
Feds: Welfare recipient lives in million-dollar home
Feds: Welfare recipient lives in million-dollar home : News : NorthwestOhio.com
the other one won a lottery for a million - and still received all government assistance in Illinois or Michigan
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
Jealous? You have the same right to prosper as anyone else, but the moment you start forcing your way to prosperity, then it no longer becomes prosperity but class warfare. You start vilifying the prosperous because they are what they are. But what becomes of you when you become prosperous?
"Nobody here is suggesting socialism"? Come on man, you can't honestly sit there and lie through your teeth like that. See that statement in bold? Yes, that is one of the most basic aspects of socialism. You can never in a million years force your way to prosperity.
I love how none of you are addressing any of the specific information in the video. You just give cheap generalizations about the nature of capitalism. Again, I favor capitalism. I just don't support the the specific kind of system we have in this country. I agree that if a person works hard, they should earn a good living. That philosophy is what makes capitalism such a successful system. However, it is not simple. Sometimes the system goes wrong. Sometimes the system is unfair.
Here are some indisputable facts on poverty in the US:
The average gross monthly income of a household receiving SNAP is $744.00. The average individual SNAP recipient receives $133.00 a month (1.50 a meal).
15% of the US population (or 46.2 million people) live in poverty.
Feedingamerica.org
(All their stats are taken directly from government data)
How can anyone justify a small group of people owning 40% of our wealth when there are so many Americans not making a sufficient living? At some point a line needs to be drawn about the way the wealth is distributed. No one here is suggesting socialism. This country thrives in part because of wealthy peoples, but that does not mean they do not need limitations.
15% of the US population (or 46.2 million people) live in poverty.
IIRC, poverty stats don't include government benefits.
So, the poverty line stats after benefits are paid are exactly what they were before. Weird.
And they only include income, so you can own a paid off house worth millions, but if your income is $12,000, for instance, still be considered under the poverty line.
Hmm, so what exactly are the stats on people with poverty level income paying off extravagant expenses?
Oh, that's right. You don't know. You are making baseless assumptions.
What is so fundamentally wrong with struggle? You say that like work is a dirty word. Some people live a life in fear of the unknown, for those folks no amount of money will ever give them a reasonable sense of security, financial or otherwise.
Nothing wrong with work. Anyone that can or needs to, should. Struggling to afford just basic necessities is wrong. Why should people work for that alone? There should more to working than just affording basic needs.
No it's not. Life is not fair, life is not supposed to be easy. Struggle is one of the best motivators in life. You want more than just the basic needs? In this country... if you can't figure out how to get past the basic needs for your family you are just not trying. Which may be because you have been "helped" to much. Just sayin. I make my kids work. It teaches them character and responsibility for oneself. Giving kids everything they need teaches them entitlement.
By your comments I'll just assume you don't understand what I said. I'll explain.
If Bob earns 10bucks an hour and Jill earns 1000 bucks an hour, then Jill's portion of your fairness based wealth pie between the two of them is 99%. And according to your OP that is not fair. If a few years later Bob is now earning 1000 bucks an hour and Jill is now earning 100000 bucks an hour then Bob is still unfairly treated because Jill is making 99% more than he is. Granted Bob is rich as hell but according to you justice is not served because Jill has too big a piece of the wealth pie.
Can you please explain what the hell food insecurity means. And also show me statistics that prove anyone in this country goes more than 12 hours without a meal.
Wow, dumb and dumber. While I have my doubts about one in every six going or being hungry, there is no doubt that millions go more than 12 hours without a meal at least every now and then. You obviously have no clue about the realities that real poor people face. Yes, they have it much better here in the US than many other parts of the world, but being poor is not fun, pretty, or glamorous. It's a tough life for most and it's not as easy to get out of as you seem to think.
One of the biggest faults of cons is that they have lost all sense of compassion. Greed had so taken over their thought process that they can no longer think straight. Getting back to the point of the thread, the point is that so few people controlling so much of the wealth is just bad for the economy. It's that plain and simple. It has nothing to do with being fair. The bulk of that wealth is not being used to help the economy grow. It's one of the main reasons our economy is stuck and going nowhere. If half of that wealth that is held by the top 1% was spread out amongst the remaining 99%, the vast majority of that wealth would be spent and put back into the economy. Economically speaking, it would do much more good than being held by a very small number of people who have so much they don't even know what to do with it. Sure the top 1% invests that money, but a great deal of it, they invest overseas.
This argument is not about what is fair and what is not; it's about what makes sense and what is better for our economy.
And again.. BY CHOICE.. for how many have luxuries??? You choose a game over a basket of healthy food, that is not the fault of the 'rich' or anyone else
YOU do not get to tell others what they HAVE to do with their wealth.. if they wish to invest it and grow business, fine.. if they wish to spend it, fine... if they wish to stick it in a savings account, fine.. if they wish to bury it in their back yard, fine....
And why are overseas investments chosen? Try the bullshit and complex tax law that is trying o be used for goddamn wealth redistribution at high levels... the Robin Hood mentality of big government..
I don't care if you think government taking 50% from people is 'better' or 'fair'... I will fight against you doing it no matter who that person is....
there is a freezer compartment in EVERY refrigerator. and the latter one is an obligatory part of any apartment.
A freezer compartment is not a standard sized freezer and that is what was quoted.
I would think we would have a mandate that the folks receiving money for food in the form of welfare assistance have passed a test showing they know how to spend their food budget wisely and have the means for doing so. For example, they should have the means to store enough food to cook meals for their family for say a week. If they don't have access to a freezer and a means to heat food i would argue they don't have a means to spend our welfare $ wisely, thus I would argue money would be better spent for a food line for that person till they can show they have the basic rudimentary means to do spend money for food wisely.
What has been done and continues to be done to America's economy and its middle class throughout the past three decades is far more than simply unfair. It is a massive, ongoing crime that nothing but a full-scale political revolution can recover from and rectify.The greatest Country in the world manages to offer Constitutional protection to a population of illegal aliens equal to the entire population of Sweden. Nobody in the Country dies of malnutrition unless they choose to do so. We have the greatest Military the world has ever seen and we saved the world from tyranny at least two times in the last century and yet the radical left still whines about the unfairness of it all.
