“Redistribute the wealth”

[danielpalos]

Tax increases are unpopular with the American people so Dem's relabeled it Wealth Redistribution. Like they relabeled abortion to "pro choice".

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

Study: U.S. CEOs earn 312 times more than average workers do

 

[danielpalos]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

So what are you going to do for the employees out there who had to get training and spent money on an education for a trade that make 15 an hour?

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

 

[danielpalos]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Here you go:

Redistribution of Wealth means making powerless people all equally poor while the Corrupt&Powerful seize most of the wealth for themselves.

here is a market friendly, left wing solution;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

 

[danielpalos]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

People earn $10 per hour because they have few if any marketable skills to contribute to someone who has the means to pay for those skills, and has a need for those skills. It is the individual's responsibility to develop skills that draw better wages. It is not the employer's responsibility to pay more than what the employee is worth to them, or to ensure that the employee is living adequately.

The reason that we have such income disparity between the middle class and the wealthy is because money makes money, and the more money that you have, the more money you make on that money.

Refuting the income inequality gap is simple. It is irrelevant BS that has no meaning beyond exciting envy and greed in uninformed people. The capital of wealthy people creates millions of high pay jobs, but otherwise their wealth has absolutely no bearing on the wealth or earning capacity of the middle class or the working class.

so what; Government fixes the Standard for our goalposts in our Republic.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

I never got $10 per hours in the 60 s depends on the State you live in if you did make that sort of money.

 

[danielpalos]

Kind of typical you don't know how something should be done you just know we have to do it. Lets start with this how much of your personal income are you willing to redistribute to deal with income inequality.

some left wingers believe in an old fashioned, positive multiplier effect;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

It does not surprise me that the meaning of such a simple phrase eludes you.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

So what are you going to do for the employees out there who had to get training and spent money on an education for a trade that make 15 an hour?

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief...

You are such an idiot. The top 3 wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers. In your dumbass mind that doesn’t matter and any attempt at closing that gap is automatically the elimination of the wealthy class. Is your simple mind not capable of the slightest bit of nuanced critical thinking?

If you have an economy of $5 trillion and no billionaires, or you have an economy of $10 trillion and half of that is owned by billionaires, what the hell is the difference to the non billionaire population of that economy? Use those critical thinking skills you are so proud of.

He has no critical thinking skills.

 

[boedicca]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Here you go:

Redistribution of Wealth means making powerless people all equally poor while the Corrupt&Powerful seize most of the wealth for themselves.

here is a market friendly, left wing solution;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

You are confused. That is a market destroying "solution".

Try learning some actual economics.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Kind of typical you don't know how something should be done you just know we have to do it. Lets start with this how much of your personal income are you willing to redistribute to deal with income inequality.

some left wingers believe in an old fashioned, positive multiplier effect;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

Anyone want to chip in and help ship danielpalos to North Korea????




.

 

[danielpalos]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

So what are you going to do for the employees out there who had to get training and spent money on an education for a trade that make 15 an hour?

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

even the dollar menu won't double.

 

[danielpalos]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Here you go:

Redistribution of Wealth means making powerless people all equally poor while the Corrupt&Powerful seize most of the wealth for themselves.

here is a market friendly, left wing solution;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

You are confused. That is a market destroying "solution".

Try learning some actual economics.

I have; they gainsay Your contention.

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

even the dollar menu won't double.

stop using obsolete economics technology from last millennium, right wingers.

 

[danielpalos]

Kind of typical you don't know how something should be done you just know we have to do it. Lets start with this how much of your personal income are you willing to redistribute to deal with income inequality.

some left wingers believe in an old fashioned, positive multiplier effect;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

Anyone want to chip in and help ship danielpalos to North Korea????




.

All I need, is a petty cash fund for that purpose.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

So what are you going to do for the employees out there who had to get training and spent money on an education for a trade that make 15 an hour?

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

even the dollar menu won't double.

Oh really?

 

[danielpalos]

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

So what are you going to do for the employees out there who had to get training and spent money on an education for a trade that make 15 an hour?

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

even the dollar menu won't double.

Oh really?

yes, really.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So what are you going to do for the employees out there who had to get training and spent money on an education for a trade that make 15 an hour?

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

even the dollar menu won't double.

Oh really?

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, unemployment compensation for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, and Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

So what are you going to do for the employees out there who had to get training and spent money on an education for a trade that make 15 an hour?

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

even the dollar menu won't double.

How does that work pole smoker?

 

[danielpalos]

We have a first world economy and want to stay that way. An upward pressure on wages is a requirement.

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

even the dollar menu won't double.

Oh really?

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

In a manner analogous to that Good capitalist who found capital solutions and did not make, "social excuses". He doubled autoworker wages not complain about minimum wages.

We have to keep an upward pressure on wages to ensure capital seeks gains from productivity instead of more stagnant, cheap labor.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you want to increase wages across the board?
What will that do to the cost of goods and services?

Of course I already know the answer I just want to see what ridiculous theory you come up with.

even the dollar menu won't double.

Oh really?

yes, really.

Tell me how thats possible.

In a manner analogous to that Good capitalist who found capital solutions and did not make, "social excuses". He doubled autoworker wages not complain about minimum wages.

We have to keep an upward pressure on wages to ensure capital seeks gains from productivity instead of more stagnant, cheap labor.

You didnt fail me....