Income Inequailty Rhetoric is Class Warfare

[The Rabbi]

I presume you separate between Republicans and Conservatives.
So...
Name me 5 Conservative non-politicians who actively represent Opportunity.
You don't have to include Donald Trump because I already know he only hires American citizens and not Business-Visas.
I mean MNC guys/gals, not the 99cent store guy/gal down the street.

Can you define what you mean by "represent opportunity" so we can tell if you're just yanking our chain or actually proposing something?

Quality education which includes areas having law enforcement, textbooks, technology and teachers.
A quality education and law enforcement leads to business loans and a more upwardly mobile life.
The opportunity for a US citizen to submit a resume, be interviewed and screened for a position without regards to ethnicity or religion.
The wage is to be determined by the requisition, not by the threat of a protest.

Now I need 5 Conservative business people I can research.

All of them. Show me one Conservative businessman (why businessmen for cripes sakes??) that opposes schools, law enforcement, textbooks, technology or teachers.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Right and the Left follow their usual predictable patterns here.

The Left:

1. Income inequality is a problem. We must do something.

2. Raising taxes is something.

3. We must raise taxes!


The Right:

Problem? What problem? There's no problem!




They are both wrong.

Remind me what the problem with income inequality is in the U.S.
Since we have had a gazillion threads on this topic and no one on the left has been able to articulate the exact problem, I predict you will mouthe some crap about the 99%living on the street while the 1% own everything.

 

[The Rabbi]

If the free market was so awesome at creating wealth as wingnuts insist, then where's all the wealth? Why is it so concentrated among the few? It's because your theory is bunkum.

The free market is great at creating wealth, but not for the many.

Government needs to step in and make sure that incomes are more evenly distributed. I'm not saying everyone should make the same income, so spare me already with those stupid charges.

The sum result of government intervention since 1980 has been to devalue labor in favor of monetization.
In other words, the only way to keep the economy going is to create the impression that something is worth more than it's worth.

How did the RTC devalue labor in favor of monetization? Do you even have a ******* clue what you're blabbering about?

 

[TRFjr]

You forgot to tell us what happens when the Haves get control.

...........................................

Well, then you get Capitalism, which consists of the Haves, and those who ask the chance to become Haves, by a full grant of Liberty.

Most recent prominent example----the United States of America.....which has for much of its existence been the greatest social compact which has thus far existed on this planet.

Yes, the happy concurrence of Freedom and the Profit Incentive...which the founding fathers left for us...has in fact resulted in the greatest society ever in the history of mankind.

Its chief enemy is Socialism.....where people revert to their natural state of "Subsistence."

Mere Subsistence is in our genes. It is the way we lived for most of our time as humans. If you assure Subsistence through the government...and in this rich country it has come to mean, not just food, clothes, housing, but a used car, t.v., Obama phone, and some cigarettes and beer money....then you will find that a huge number of people will accept it happily....and just sit on the porch.

It is the sad discovery Socialism has made in every place it has had its way...and when the confiscated money runs out, they borrow, and when the borrowed money runs out...it collapses.

Socialism always fails.

Capitalism risks failure if it does not control its chief flaw...which is, of course is Greed. For at least 130 years...our chief problem with controlling Greed...has come from New England...more specifically New York.

It is pretty out of control today...and it is up to Obama and Holder to do something about it but they don't...out of fear they will cut the money TO THEM off...in other words, Wall Street owns them as it does that dick, Schumer and a bunch of other Liberal assholes.

You Liberals need to clean up your own backyard, and you need to do it without saddling the Heartland with Socialism.

That's weird, it was my understanding that when the U.S. was founded Americans considered their primary enemy to be MONARCHY, not socialism. I doubt that the concept of socialism even existed at the time of the American revolution. If you believe that anti-socialism or capitalism is a founding principal of the U.S., then apparently you've been victimized by cold war brainwashing.

You are dead wrong in saying that "Socialism always fails". Socialism is alive and well in Europe. As a matter of fact quasi-socialism worked quite well in the U.S. between 1950-1980.

On the other hand capitalism has been a complete failure. It was a failure throughout the world in the 18th century - which is why liberalism and socialism were invented. (remember: "Necessity is the mother of invention").

You also apparently do not understand what capitalism (or socialism) is. (Another product of your cold war brain washing):

Capitalism is using money to make money. Wall St. and the New York financial sector are capitalists.

"Main St" is partially capitalistic - ownership of asset and profitability constitute capitalism, but the sale of goods and services is not in and of itself capitalism.

The difference between "Main St." and "Wall St." is that "Main St." actually gives something back to society - they produce. "Wall St." just sucks up money without contributing anything back.

Greed is the heart of capitalism, so when you say that the problem is the New york financial sector's "greed" is our problem, you're saying that "Capitalism", in its purist form, is the problem.

your getting economic systems and government systems confused. capitalism has never failed it is the oldest and best economic system. it is the default system been around as long as the cave man have, when the first stone spear head was traded for a hunk of meat
When all other economic system fails capitalism find its way back. use communism for example when it was failing the capitalist black market took over.
why is it for other economic systems to work capitalism has to be outlawed

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's wrong with class warfare, exactly?

You mean what's wrong with looting people?

We know you don't understand.

Now that's a perfect example of class warfare. The lament of the richer that giving the poorer a voice in government will only allow them to 'loot' the rich.

That's a perfect example of why conservatives despise democratic government.

 

[Indeependent]

Can you define what you mean by "represent opportunity" so we can tell if you're just yanking our chain or actually proposing something?

Quality education which includes areas having law enforcement, textbooks, technology and teachers.
A quality education and law enforcement leads to business loans and a more upwardly mobile life.
The opportunity for a US citizen to submit a resume, be interviewed and screened for a position without regards to ethnicity or religion.
The wage is to be determined by the requisition, not by the threat of a protest.

Now I need 5 Conservative business people I can research.

All of them. Show me one Conservative businessman (why businessmen for cripes sakes??) that opposes schools, law enforcement, textbooks, technology or teachers.

Key phrase which you ignored...
"The opportunity for a US citizen to submit a resume, be interviewed and screened for a position without regards to ethnicity or religion."

I have been reading the WSJ, Fortune, Forbes, etc... since 2006, so don't try and hand me the Limbaugh line, "Your CEO LOVES YOU!".

Back to at least 5 Conservative MNC business people who are pro-American opportunity.
You name them and I'll research their "opinion" of US citizens.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Income Inequality" is flat out Communism

Dems finally came home to Mao

 

[TRFjr]

If the free market was so awesome at creating wealth as wingnuts insist, then where's all the wealth? Why is it so concentrated among the few? It's because your theory is bunkum.

The free market is great at creating wealth, but not for the many.

Government needs to step in and make sure that incomes are more evenly distributed. I'm not saying everyone should make the same income, so spare me already with those stupid charges.

because we don't have a true free market it is a over regulated government manipulated market that has stifled opportunity and the ones who have the resources to give those opportunities

because of regulations and taxes it is next to impossible for the average America to start a business or get an idea devolved and on the market

I will give you a recent prime example how a little girl had an idea and want to help her parents with the expense of her getting braces. she went to her uncles farm picked mistletoe and took it to a local market to sell. a simple pure example of capitalism they told the girls she couldn't sell her mistletoe and suggested her to beg instead. it wasn't capitalism that failed that little girl. it was government regulations that failed that little girl and kept her from taking advantage of an opportunity to create wealth for her self

 

[NYcarbineer]

two pages and not one person has given a convincing argument as matter of fact no argument why would you need to take from one to give to another to bring others out of poverty

Income inequity rhetoric is just propaganda that only works on the ignorant. used by the elites to rally the useful idiots

A finite economic system can only generate a finite amount of wealth over any finite period of time.

How that wealth gets divided within that economy is what determinies income inequality.

 

[Indeependent]

"Income Inequality" is flat out Communism

Dems finally came home to Mao

Started by Conservatives as I have heard no one else quote the phrase.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

When wealthy powerful corporate interests fight to lower the minimum wage, is that class warfare?

They pay their lobbyists inside the Beltway MUCH BETTER than the poor people pay theirs.

 

[bripat9643]

two pages and not one person has given a convincing argument as matter of fact no argument why would you need to take from one to give to another to bring others out of poverty

Income inequity rhetoric is just propaganda that only works on the ignorant. used by the elites to rally the useful idiots

A finite economic system can only generate a finite amount of wealth over any finite period of time.

How that wealth gets divided within that economy is what determinies income inequality.

In a market economy wealth isn't "divided." It's earned. The fact that some people have superior skills, intelligence and ambition is the primary reason for differences in income.

 

[blackhawk]

What's wrong with class warfare, exactly?

You mean besides the fact it accomplishes nothing other than to convince people that any failure or misfortune in their lives is because of the actions of other's and never themselves and convinces them the only way the can better their situation is by having government intervene with income distribution from the wealthy to them?

 

[TRFjr]

two pages and not one person has given a convincing argument as matter of fact no argument why would you need to take from one to give to another to bring others out of poverty

Income inequity rhetoric is just propaganda that only works on the ignorant. used by the elites to rally the useful idiots

A finite economic system can only generate a finite amount of wealth over any finite period of time.

How that wealth gets divided within that economy is what determinies income inequality.

wealth is only limited by recourses and resources are virtually infinite there for there is an infinite amount of wealth all it takes is ambition, ingenuity, sweat equity, and a little luck to tap into that wealth

 

[bripat9643]

two pages and not one person has given a convincing argument as matter of fact no argument why would you need to take from one to give to another to bring others out of poverty

Income inequity rhetoric is just propaganda that only works on the ignorant. used by the elites to rally the useful idiots

A finite economic system can only generate a finite amount of wealth over any finite period of time.

How that wealth gets divided within that economy is what determinies income inequality.

All you've said is that the amount of wealth the economy produced this year is the amount of wealth the economy produced this year - a tautology.

The wealth producing capacity of an economy can grow over time if government doesn't sabotage it. That's the point that seems to elude Obama fluffers like you.

 

[Indeependent]

two pages and not one person has given a convincing argument as matter of fact no argument why would you need to take from one to give to another to bring others out of poverty

Income inequity rhetoric is just propaganda that only works on the ignorant. used by the elites to rally the useful idiots

A finite economic system can only generate a finite amount of wealth over any finite period of time.

How that wealth gets divided within that economy is what determinies income inequality.

In a market economy wealth isn't "divided." It's earned. The fact that some people have superior skills, intelligence and ambition is the primary reason for differences in income.

Then how is a moron like GW wealthy?
The Walmart inheritors.
Your statement is partially true.

 

[Vox]

Of course it is.

It is a classic hate your neighbor tactic.

 

[Vox]

Then how is a moron like GW wealthy?
The Walmart inheritors.

None of your business, loser hater

 

[Indeependent]

Then how is a moron like GW wealthy?
The Walmart inheritors.

None of your business, loser hater

Ad hominem...I win again!

 

[The Rabbi]

Quality education which includes areas having law enforcement, textbooks, technology and teachers.
A quality education and law enforcement leads to business loans and a more upwardly mobile life.
The opportunity for a US citizen to submit a resume, be interviewed and screened for a position without regards to ethnicity or religion.
The wage is to be determined by the requisition, not by the threat of a protest.

Now I need 5 Conservative business people I can research.

All of them. Show me one Conservative businessman (why businessmen for cripes sakes??) that opposes schools, law enforcement, textbooks, technology or teachers.

Key phrase which you ignored...
"The opportunity for a US citizen to submit a resume, be interviewed and screened for a position without regards to ethnicity or religion."

I have been reading the WSJ, Fortune, Forbes, etc... since 2006, so don't try and hand me the Limbaugh line, "Your CEO LOVES YOU!".

Back to at least 5 Conservative MNC business people who are pro-American opportunity.
You name them and I'll research their "opinion" of US citizens.

You understand that discriminating on the basis of ethnicity and religion is illegal under Federal law, right?
You also understand that companies scramble to get the best talent at the lowest price, right? Why would they deny themselves the best candidate at the best price just because of his religion or ethnicity??
Show me the CEO or any high level employee of any corporation who wants to prevent citizens from submitting a resume. I want names.