How the rich get richer

[Bass v 2.0]

So your basic thesis is that if people work hard and make lots of money then they have no right to it. Right?

Who said that? The rich should own up to their part of the tax burden instead of shifting onto middle and lower classes, its the equivalent of a millionare going into a clothes stores and doing price tag switching.

 

[Big Black Dog]

So your basic thesis is that if people work hard and make lots of money then they have no right to it. Right?

Who said that? The rich should own up to their part of the tax burden instead of shifting onto middle and lower classes, its the equivalent of a millionare going into a clothes stores and doing price tag switching.

Next I suppose you will claim that the rich got richer because over 50% of the American population doesn't pay any income tax. Please. Spare me.

 

[CMike]

When someone works hard and achieves wealth sometimes his or her achievement comes at the expense of the interest of other people, it's unavoidable. The good thing about our economic system is that everyone has an opportunity to be a wealth earner.
Wealth is not a 0-sum gain, when I earn a thousand dollars I'm not taking it from a poor person. If you want to see real poverty than keep supporting the current economic path our country is on now. Opportunity should never be limited especially by government.

I completely disagree. If someone becomes wealthier that is good for everyone.

I mentioned this before. I was pretty broke about two years ago. I have a MBA I'm in Michigan which has been really bad thanks to the democrat governor.

I took a job doing door to door sales for commission only. I then created my own business doing the same thing. I am fortunate. My income increased 12 times since 2007.

I know employ a whole bunch of salespeople. I am providing a livelihood to my people, and I am providing a good product, at a good price, to the customers.

So how is this at the expense of others?

 

[CMike]

All the brain washed right wingnuts will be telling how hard the rich have it as they pay so much in taxes. Of course when you make millions that ain't so bad. Has America become the only working plutocracy in history?

Myth: The rich get rich because of their merit. The rich get rich because of their merit.


"How large are these externalities, which must be regarded as owned jointly by members of the whole society? When we compare the poorest with the richest nations, it is hard to conclude that social capital can produce less than about 90 percent of income in wealthy societies like those of the United States or Northwestern Europe. On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned." UBI and the Flat Tax

The conservative welfare state. The Conservative Nanny State

"....conservatives favor the market over government intervention. In fact, conservatives rely on a range of “nanny state” policies that ensure the rich get richer while leaving most Americans worse off. It’s time for the rules to change. Sound economic policy should harness the market in ways that produce desirable social outcomes – decent wages, good jobs and affordable health care."

There is little doubt that the game is skewed to favor those who have wealth. The "nanny state" for the wealthy ensures that the risk of their investments is minimized and that any potential impediments to increasing wealth are removed.

The super wealthy do not get that way by taking risks, they get that way by ensuring there are no risks in their investments

There are always risks in investment.

I am soon starting an office in my third state. That is a risk.

In fact, there is a much bigger risk.

For example, let's say you own a restaurant. If your restaurant goes bankrupt, you have lost your iinvestment, and you may now be deeply in debt because of it. If you lose a job, you lose that income from that job, but you aren't going to be in debt because of the job loss regarding the job itself.

 

[Hum Dinger]

There are many ways that the wealth of America and the world is trickled up to the wealthiest.

It's also true that in a capiatlist society, everything is stacked in favor of the wealthy.

It is absolutely false (to the point of being a sick joke) to say that the wealthy get weallthy thru hard work - they get wealthy thru other peoples hard work - people that they steal from on a daily basis. They do not create wealth, they control finances whch in turn means that they control all resources.

But, the fault for the trickle up of wealth in our society lies with the brainless working class as well:

First of all, the working class and poor of America have been sucked into a philosophy of materialism and consumerism. Everyone lives either beyond their means or at the brink. Social status demands it. This has led to a credit based society which in turn means a life of debt for most and NO net wealth accumulation over the life time of the vast majority of the people. It is only a small percentage of the people that accumulate net wealth over the course of their lifetime. Those that do pass that wealth from generation to generation which is how the truly 'wealthy class' is formed.

I, with no hesitation, blame American women for this. They are the most unshameful materialist women that the human race has ever known. They demand $$$ from men for their 'affections', this in turn forces men to have a dog eat dog philosophy towards business - they will do anything to get money regardless of any moral considerations.

Note: I did NOT marry an American girl and my family happily lives within our means.

I've known many very wealthy American men who are absolutely miserable. They are surrounded by pyscophants. They know that the day they stop being the 'big dog with the bucks', their wives, friends and even children will not want to know them. So they spend their (ultimately pitiful) lives grabbing for all the money they can in any way they can, without they slightest regard for any moral considerations.

The second fault of the American working class is the failure to unite and bargain collectively. Yes, some unoins have been successful at this, but most Americans are not smart enough to unionize. White collar workers are particular dumb in this regard.

In a competitive system, an individual worker is disempowered in negotiating with his employer. They have to take what they get, which is always much less than the true value of their work. Employers do give white collar workers some boost in salary, just to maintain the social order, but what they get paid is a far cry from their true value.

For a system to be truly competitive, workers must be able to be competitve in negotiating with their employers. This can only be accomplished thru collective bargaining.

The idea that a worker can always work someplace else, if they think that they can do better, is a load of crap. Constantly moving you family, resettling in at a new job, losing medical coverage, learning a new job, losing seniority traps employees into their present job.

Anything other than paying an employee their true value, measured by the value productive work of the employee, is thievery.

 

[CMike]

When someone works hard and achieves wealth sometimes his or her achievement comes at the expense of the interest of other people, it's unavoidable. The good thing about our economic system is that everyone has an opportunity to be a wealth earner.
Wealth is not a 0-sum gain, when I earn a thousand dollars I'm not taking it from a poor person. If you want to see real poverty than keep supporting the current economic path our country is on now. Opportunity should never be limited especially by government.

Read the links about tax loopholes and corporate welfare, those are things that are not earned, middle class and lower class people work just as hard and put in even more hours than the rich yet they are not getting richer, the rich put in less hours and get richer, the notion that everyone can somehow get rich and have the same opportunities to get rich just like the wealthy is pure individualistic lies and propaganda.

Corporate welfare? It seems to me that if I was employed by a corporation I would be happy to see that my government values the worth of the company I work for.
Corporations do a tremendous amount of good for our society and without them we would be in a world of hurt.
If a corporation gets a tax break or a "loop Hole" and can continue to create, employ, and innovate than that's a good thing for society and a worthy investment if you ask me. A far more worthy investment than extending unemployment compensation.

I agree. Letting companies keep more of their own money is not welfare.

Also, companies provide livelihoods for people.

 

[rightwinger]

All the brain washed right wingnuts will be telling how hard the rich have it as they pay so much in taxes. Of course when you make millions that ain't so bad. Has America become the only working plutocracy in history?

Myth: The rich get rich because of their merit. The rich get rich because of their merit.


"How large are these externalities, which must be regarded as owned jointly by members of the whole society? When we compare the poorest with the richest nations, it is hard to conclude that social capital can produce less than about 90 percent of income in wealthy societies like those of the United States or Northwestern Europe. On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned." UBI and the Flat Tax

The conservative welfare state. The Conservative Nanny State

"....conservatives favor the market over government intervention. In fact, conservatives rely on a range of “nanny state” policies that ensure the rich get richer while leaving most Americans worse off. It’s time for the rules to change. Sound economic policy should harness the market in ways that produce desirable social outcomes – decent wages, good jobs and affordable health care."

There is little doubt that the game is skewed to favor those who have wealth. The "nanny state" for the wealthy ensures that the risk of their investments is minimized and that any potential impediments to increasing wealth are removed.

The super wealthy do not get that way by taking risks, they get that way by ensuring there are no risks in their investments

There are always risks in investment.

I am soon starting an office in my third state. That is a risk.

In fact, there is a much bigger risk.

For example, let's say you own a restaurant. If your restaurant goes bankrupt, you have lost your iinvestment, and you may now be deeply in debt because of it. If you lose a job, you lose that income from that job, but you aren't going to be in debt because of the job loss regarding the job itself.

Better yet.

Lets suppose you own an Amway dealership. You "guilt" all your friends and family into investing in your product. You even talk some gullible scmuck to join your Ponzi scheme and funnel his profits to you

There is no risk involed

 

[Douger]

Easy.
They get people to believe in fairy tales.
Here is a dose of reality for you bible holding idiots
Jimmy Swaggart's House (Bing Maps) - Virtual Globetrotting

 

[CMike]

There is little doubt that the game is skewed to favor those who have wealth. The "nanny state" for the wealthy ensures that the risk of their investments is minimized and that any potential impediments to increasing wealth are removed.

The super wealthy do not get that way by taking risks, they get that way by ensuring there are no risks in their investments

There are always risks in investment.

I am soon starting an office in my third state. That is a risk.

In fact, there is a much bigger risk.

For example, let's say you own a restaurant. If your restaurant goes bankrupt, you have lost your iinvestment, and you may now be deeply in debt because of it. If you lose a job, you lose that income from that job, but you aren't going to be in debt because of the job loss regarding the job itself.

Better yet.

Lets suppose you own an Amway dealership. You "guilt" all your friends and family into investing in your product. You even talk some gullible scmuck to join your Ponzi scheme and funnel his profits to you

There is no risk involed

My business has nothing to do with Amway, however, let's say you own a sewer company. You have some major investments in it. Let's say it goes bankrupt, you can now be in major debt. However, let's say there is a brainless worker called rightwinger, he would lose his job, but he wouldn't be in deep debt as a result.

 

[The Rabbi]

So your basic thesis is that if people work hard and make lots of money then they have no right to it. Right?

Who said that? The rich should own up to their part of the tax burden instead of shifting onto middle and lower classes, its the equivalent of a millionare going into a clothes stores and doing price tag switching.

The top 10% of income earners already pay like 80% of income tax collected.
You'll need a new gig here.

 

[Sherry]

So change the laws, such as implementing a flat tax. It's stupid to paint rich people in a negative light for taking advantage of ways to hand over less of their earnings to the government. I don't blame anyone for trying to keep their money away from a bunch of corrupt assholes who will just piss it away.

 

[Gadawg73]

The way I became wealthy was I kept doing what made me my first nickel over and over and over again more diligent each time.
The reason rich people are rich is because they keep doing the things that made them rich.
The reason poor adults are poor is they keep doing the things over and over again that has kept them poor.
One of my neighbors is an Oriental man. How was he able to come here and become wealthy?
Something about a work ethic.
No cry babies. Wham it zero.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Oh how terrible, people are making money!!!!!!!!!

Give me a break.

 

[CMike]

The way I became wealthy was I kept doing what made me my first nickel over and over and over again more diligent each time.
The reason rich people are rich is because they keep doing the things that made them rich.
The reason poor adults are poor is they keep doing the things over and over again that has kept them poor.
One of my neighbors is an Oriental man. How was he able to come here and become wealthy?
Something about a work ethic.
No cry babies. Wham it zero.

 

[CMike]

Oh how terrible, people are making money!!!!!!!!!

Give me a break.

That's not fair. Everyone should be poor.

 

[rightwinger]

So your basic thesis is that if people work hard and make lots of money then they have no right to it. Right?

Who said that? The rich should own up to their part of the tax burden instead of shifting onto middle and lower classes, its the equivalent of a millionare going into a clothes stores and doing price tag switching.

The top 10% of income earners already pay like 80% of income tax collected.
You'll need a new gig here.

Golly gee Mr Rabbi....

They call it an INCOME TAX. If 10% of income earners are paying 80% of the tax that must mean they are monopolizing 80% of available income.

If they don't like it...they are always able to "Trickle down" some of that income so they wouldn't have that unbearable burden

 

[CMike]

Who said that? The rich should own up to their part of the tax burden instead of shifting onto middle and lower classes, its the equivalent of a millionare going into a clothes stores and doing price tag switching.

The top 10% of income earners already pay like 80% of income tax collected.
You'll need a new gig here.

Golly gee Mr Rabbi....

They call it an INCOME TAX. If 10% of income earners are paying 80% of the tax that must mean they are monopolizing 80% of available income.

If they don't like it...they are always able to "Trickle down" some of that income so they wouldn't have that unbearable burden

Trickle up never works.

 

[rightwinger]

There are always risks in investment.

I am soon starting an office in my third state. That is a risk.

In fact, there is a much bigger risk.

For example, let's say you own a restaurant. If your restaurant goes bankrupt, you have lost your iinvestment, and you may now be deeply in debt because of it. If you lose a job, you lose that income from that job, but you aren't going to be in debt because of the job loss regarding the job itself.

Better yet.

Lets suppose you own an Amway dealership. You "guilt" all your friends and family into investing in your product. You even talk some gullible scmuck to join your Ponzi scheme and funnel his profits to you

There is no risk involed

My business has nothing to do with Amway, however, let's say you own a sewer company. You have some major investments in it. Let's say it goes bankrupt, you can now be in major debt. However, let's say there is a brainless worker called rightwinger, he would lose his job, but he wouldn't be in deep debt as a result.

LOL

You are not very good at this are you???

 

[Intense]

Who said that? The rich should own up to their part of the tax burden instead of shifting onto middle and lower classes, its the equivalent of a millionare going into a clothes stores and doing price tag switching.

The top 10% of income earners already pay like 80% of income tax collected.
You'll need a new gig here.

Golly gee Mr Rabbi....

They call it an INCOME TAX. If 10% of income earners are paying 80% of the tax that must mean they are monopolizing 80% of available income.

If they don't like it...they are always able to "Trickle down" some of that income so they wouldn't have that unbearable burden

If that Tax was a fixed percentage, and not progressive, You might have a foundation.

 

[CMike]

Better yet.

Lets suppose you own an Amway dealership. You "guilt" all your friends and family into investing in your product. You even talk some gullible scmuck to join your Ponzi scheme and funnel his profits to you

There is no risk involed

My business has nothing to do with Amway, however, let's say you own a sewer company. You have some major investments in it. Let's say it goes bankrupt, you can now be in major debt. However, let's say there is a brainless worker called rightwinger, he would lose his job, but he wouldn't be in deep debt as a result.

LOL

You are not very good at this are you???

I'm having fun. I'm more than happy to keep it up.