Not for the Willfully Ignorant

[Wry Catcher]

A rather long study on wealth in America. One which may challenge your beliefs:

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

Discuss

 

[Intense]

A rather long study on wealth in America. One which may challenge your beliefs:

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

Discuss

We also need to distinguish wealth from income. Income is what people earn from work, but also from dividends, interest, and any rents or royalties that are paid to them on properties they own. In theory, those who own a great deal of wealth may or may not have high incomes, depending on the returns they receive from their wealth, but in reality those at the very top of the wealth distribution usually have the most income. (But it's important to note that for the rich, most of that income does not come from "working": in 2008, only 19% of the income reported by the 13,480 individuals or families making over $10 million came from wages and salaries. See Norris, 2010, for more details.)

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

It is obvious, Wry, if you think about it. How many High Government Officials do you think the Kennedy's, Rockefeller's, Gates, Soros, Speilberg know? That is from the Left, it's just the tip of the iceberg. That Class is not touchable, Left or Right, by what we do with Tax Law. The more draconian Tax Law gets, the more we hurt ourselves. They have the power to move out of the way, the power to shape government and misdirect all efforts on the current track. Only by breaking Monopolies, encouraging competition, are we going to see any fair play result. The track we are currently on secures the already established powers that be.

 

[Wry Catcher]

From the study:

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010).

Of course the echo chamber won't read any of the study, but that concerns me not. For those on the fence, or for those of us who value our democratic institutions the results of this study are sobering.
We are no longer a democratic republic, or as the right wants to reframe us, a constitutional republic, we are today a Plutocracy and that fact should scare the crap out of all patriotic Americans.

 

[Intense]

From the study:

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010).

Of course the echo chamber won't read any of the study, but that concerns me not. For those on the fence, or for those of us who value our democratic institutions the results of this study are sobering.
We are no longer a democratic republic, or as the right wants to reframe us, a constitutional republic, we are today a Plutocracy and that fact should scare the crap out of all patriotic Americans.

Hamilton changed that. It is his Class he was interested in taking care of.

 

[Whipp]

We live in times now where a Private enterprise 'company' can be bigger than a nation itself . There are now companies bigger than many former powerful nations such as holland and spain.

The issue is are companaies compatiable with nationality. A company can go where it wants effecitvely and now its nations who bend over backwards to impress them to bring their 'investment' to their region

And what is that will attract a huge company or investor to come to you? Your willingness to accept their terms. So who has the power these days and will this tend continue..

you should be alarmed just how little power your democratic systems now have.

 

[Intense]

We live in times now where a Private enterprise 'company' can be bigger than a nation itself . There are now companies bigger than many former powerful nations such as holland and spain.

The issue is are companaies compatiable with nationality. A company can go where it wants effecitvely and now its nations who bend over backwards to impress them to bring their 'investment' to their region

And what is that will attract a huge company or investor to come to you? Your willingness to accept their terms. So who has the power these days and will this tend continue..

you should be alarmed just how little power your democratic systems now have.

Money has the power over your life that you let it have. Monopoly, special Privilege, give the big money advantages that would otherwise be less. When you have the freedom to not do business with, there is less power over you. As a consumer you should be able to choose what you support. Should our Constitution be taken seriously, and our government decide to protect for the common good against all enemies foreign and domestic, including the threat of Corporate and Government Tyranny, we will be better off. So will Italy and Europe if you would do the same.

 

[Truthmatters]

Someday these fools will regret licking the feet of their enslavers.

 

[Intense]

Someday these fools will regret licking the feet of their enslavers.

Do you understand who the enslavers are??? Who is bringing Totalitarian Rule and undermining Free Will??? It is in both Parties TM. Progressivism is a part of it, as much as it spends convincing people that it actually gives a shit about the Individual.

 

[martybegan]

From the study:

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010).

Of course the echo chamber won't read any of the study, but that concerns me not. For those on the fence, or for those of us who value our democratic institutions the results of this study are sobering.
We are no longer a democratic republic, or as the right wants to reframe us, a constitutional republic, we are today a Plutocracy and that fact should scare the crap out of all patriotic Americans.

Ah the old echo chamber line. Standard "Since this person disagrees with me they are either part of the massive rich person conspiracy, or some idiot sheeple."

This country is still a democratic republic, but the main threat isnt corporations, its career politicians, whose place in the framework of our government was never anticipated. Get rid of those and a side affect would be less corportate interest, as people wouldnt be around long enough to get corrupted.

I find it far more disturbing that some idiot like Rangel, who was under investgation DURNING THE ELECTION can get re-elected purely from the fact that some people just vote for the incumbent/party line out of reflex than that GE can have an ad saying they like "this guy"

Term limits. Now.

 

[Truthmatters]

All term limits do is limmit the peoples ability to choose who they want.

 

[Intense]

All term limits do is limmit the peoples ability to choose who they want.

Agreed. But where they are in effect like NYC, they should be either respected or dropped. What Bloomberg did was plain wrong.

 

[martybegan]

All term limits do is limmit the peoples ability to choose who they want.

Agreed. But where they are in effect like NYC, they should be either respected or dropped. What Bloomberg did was plain wrong.

I always find it comical that those that rail against "the contiuous corporate opression" of our society often have NO issue that career politicans are not only have far more ability to be opressive, but often (from both parties) are the biggest enablers of corporations influence on our government.

Give anyone 30 years of being bombarded by lobbyists and interest groups and sooner or later even the most principled person will cave. It is even worse at the local level, where some parties and machines have been entrenched for decades.

 

[Mr Natural]

Someday these fools will regret licking the feet of their enslavers.

I doubt it. They're way too stupid to realize they're getting screwed by their idols on a daily basis.

Just look at the number of anti-union threads. Working people pissed off about other working people because they might have gotten themselves a better deal.

 

[Wry Catcher]

We live in times now where a Private enterprise 'company' can be bigger than a nation itself . There are now companies bigger than many former powerful nations such as holland and spain.

The issue is are companaies compatiable with nationality. A company can go where it wants effecitvely and now its nations who bend over backwards to impress them to bring their 'investment' to their region

And what is that will attract a huge company or investor to come to you? Your willingness to accept their terms. So who has the power these days and will this tend continue..

you should be alarmed just how little power your democratic systems now have.

Money has the power over your life that you let it have. Monopoly, special Privilege, give the big money advantages that would otherwise be less. When you have the freedom to not do business with, there is less power over you. As a consumer you should be able to choose what you support. Should our Constitution be taken seriously, and our government decide to protect for the common good against all enemies foreign and domestic, including the threat of Corporate and Government Tyranny, we will be better off. So will Italy and Europe if you would do the same.

The lack of money has much greater power over the individual, wouldn't you agree?
The question is, is liberty to be defined as the right to live in poverty? Is it really freedom when 85% of each dollar earned may go to the wealthiest 1% of our citizens?

 

[Wry Catcher]

All term limits do is limmit the peoples ability to choose who they want.

Agreed. But where they are in effect like NYC, they should be either respected or dropped. What Bloomberg did was plain wrong.

I always find it comical that those that rail against "the contiuous corporate opression" of our society often have NO issue that career politicans are not only have far more ability to be opressive, but often (from both parties) are the biggest enablers of corporations influence on our government.

Give anyone 30 years of being bombarded by lobbyists and interest groups and sooner or later even the most principled person will cave. It is even worse at the local level, where some parties and machines have been entrenched for decades.

The people have no control over the CEO/CFO's of corporate America; they do have power over who represents them in the Congress.
A member of Congress has a duty to represent his district or state; both of which send lobbyists to Wash. D.C.
Lobbyists can and do provide information to decision makers and their aides, unfortunately they also provide tickets, booze, sex and drugs; future jobs and promises too.
My suggestion, watch their feet, not their lips (it's not what they say but what they do that matters) Hence, an educated and informed voter is the greatest safeguard; sadly, knowing this an effort is made by some to guise opinion as fact and unprovable axioms as immutable truths (listen to Rush Limbaugh for examples).

 

[martybegan]

We live in times now where a Private enterprise 'company' can be bigger than a nation itself . There are now companies bigger than many former powerful nations such as holland and spain.

The issue is are companaies compatiable with nationality. A company can go where it wants effecitvely and now its nations who bend over backwards to impress them to bring their 'investment' to their region

And what is that will attract a huge company or investor to come to you? Your willingness to accept their terms. So who has the power these days and will this tend continue..

you should be alarmed just how little power your democratic systems now have.

Money has the power over your life that you let it have. Monopoly, special Privilege, give the big money advantages that would otherwise be less. When you have the freedom to not do business with, there is less power over you. As a consumer you should be able to choose what you support. Should our Constitution be taken seriously, and our government decide to protect for the common good against all enemies foreign and domestic, including the threat of Corporate and Government Tyranny, we will be better off. So will Italy and Europe if you would do the same.

The lack of money has much greater power over the individual, wouldn't you agree?
The question is, is liberty to be defined as the right to live in poverty? Is it really freedom when 85% of each dollar earned may go to the wealthiest 1% of our citizens?

Is it freedom when you use the government to force how the money goes where? Who said life is fair? and does shuttling that money to the federal goverment make things better? Now you have the wealth going into a far more massive and burecratic organization than any corporation out there.

 

[martybegan]

Agreed. But where they are in effect like NYC, they should be either respected or dropped. What Bloomberg did was plain wrong.

I always find it comical that those that rail against "the contiuous corporate opression" of our society often have NO issue that career politicans are not only have far more ability to be opressive, but often (from both parties) are the biggest enablers of corporations influence on our government.

Give anyone 30 years of being bombarded by lobbyists and interest groups and sooner or later even the most principled person will cave. It is even worse at the local level, where some parties and machines have been entrenched for decades.

The people have no control over the CEO/CFO's of corporate America; they do have power over who represents them in the Congress.
A member of Congress has a duty to represent his district or state; both of which send lobbyists to Wash. D.C.
Lobbyists can and do provide information to decision makers and their aides, unfortunately they also provide tickets, booze, sex and drugs; future jobs and promises too.
My suggestion, watch their feet, not their lips (it's not what they say but what they do that matters) Hence, an educated and informed voter is the greatest safeguard; sadly, knowing this an effort is made by some to guise opinion as fact and unprovable axioms as immutable truths (listen to Rush Limbaugh for examples).

The government does have control over corporations, just not total control. Laws can be made to regulate how they operate, I do not deny that.

 

[Truthmatters]

Why is the solution to politicains you dont like include the reduction of who the people can choose?


Because you dont care about REAL solutions you just want easy fixes, IT WONT WORK

 

[Truthmatters]

I always find it comical that those that rail against "the contiuous corporate opression" of our society often have NO issue that career politicans are not only have far more ability to be opressive, but often (from both parties) are the biggest enablers of corporations influence on our government.

Give anyone 30 years of being bombarded by lobbyists and interest groups and sooner or later even the most principled person will cave. It is even worse at the local level, where some parties and machines have been entrenched for decades.

The people have no control over the CEO/CFO's of corporate America; they do have power over who represents them in the Congress.
A member of Congress has a duty to represent his district or state; both of which send lobbyists to Wash. D.C.
Lobbyists can and do provide information to decision makers and their aides, unfortunately they also provide tickets, booze, sex and drugs; future jobs and promises too.
My suggestion, watch their feet, not their lips (it's not what they say but what they do that matters) Hence, an educated and informed voter is the greatest safeguard; sadly, knowing this an effort is made by some to guise opinion as fact and unprovable axioms as immutable truths (listen to Rush Limbaugh for examples).

The government does have control over corporations, just not total control. Laws can be made to regulate how they operate, I do not deny that.

Your politicains say the government is here to serve those corporations not regulate them

 

[Quantum Windbag]

All term limits do is limmit the peoples ability to choose who they want.

Tell you what, get rid of gerrymandering, which does more to eliminate choice in voting than term limits possibly could, and then I will start paying attention to your, admittedly valid, gripes about term limits and the problem with them.