Thanks to the media, the 1% are poised to "take the rest"

[Dot Com]

Shows such as Fox & Friends who keep their audiences' in a perpetual slumber

by making big deals out of prayer or abortion :yawn: as their great nation is being taken to the cleaners will never announce info like this:

BBC News - Richest 1 to own more than rest of world Oxfam says

The charity's research shows that the share of the world's wealth owned by the richest 1% increased from 44% in 2009 to 48% last year.

On current trends, Oxfam says it expects the wealthiest 1% to own more than 50% of the world's wealth by 2016.

Nothing to see here. Move along now drones. (thats what rw media says)

discuss...

 

[The Rabbi]

Shows such as Fox & Friends who keep their audiences' in a perpetual slumber

by making big deals out of prayer or abortion :yawn: as their great nation is being taken to the cleaners will never announce info like this:

BBC News - Richest 1 to own more than rest of world Oxfam says

The charity's research shows that the share of the world's wealth owned by the richest 1% increased from 44% in 2009 to 48% last year.

On current trends, Oxfam says it expects the wealthiest 1% to own more than 50% of the world's wealth by 2016.

Nothing to see here. Move along now drones. (thats what rw media says)

discuss...

Remind me what the problem here is.
And given the widely diverse systems "the top 1%" live under there isn t really a government solution. Whch must kill progressives.

 

[Dot Com]

 

[Dot Com]

 

[Dot Com]

 

[SwimExpert]

Remind me what the problem here is.
And given the widely diverse systems "the top 1%" live under there isn t really a government solution. Whch must kill progressives.

Your lack of a cerebral cortex is the problem.

Of course, we could look at this historically. Wealth inequality is a fact of human life. It cannot be escaped. But human societies have always demonstrated certain trends regarding inequality. There's a stable range of inequality a society can handle before things start to go very badly.

 

[The Rabbi]

Remind me what the problem here is.
And given the widely diverse systems "the top 1%" live under there isn t really a government solution. Whch must kill progressives.

Your lack of a cerebral cortex is the problem.

Of course, we could look at this historically. Wealth inequality is a fact of human life. It cannot be escaped. But human societies have always demonstrated certain trends regarding inequality. There's a stable range of inequality a society can handle before things start to go very badly.

I ask a question and Nutcom responds with comics. That's the deepest he can go.

As for you, your post is a marvel of unsupported generalizations.
At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?
You are full of empty knee jerk reactions and not much more.
Remind me how you're a conservative. I need a laugh.

 

[SwimExpert]

As for you, your post is a marvel of unsupported generalizations.
At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?
You are full of empty knee jerk reactions and not much more.
Remind me how you're a conservative. I need a laugh.

Wow, you really missed the point. As you said, this is an international phenomenon and there isn't a government solution. At least you got that much right. So, instead of looking for government solutions, we can be mindful of history as we reflect about the present.

I know, thinking is the epitome of "knee jerk reactions" for you. Forgive me for suggesting such a drastic course of inaction.

 

[kaz]

Shows such as Fox & Friends who keep their audiences' in a perpetual slumber

by making big deals out of prayer or abortion :yawn: as their great nation is being taken to the cleaners will never announce info like this:

BBC News - Richest 1 to own more than rest of world Oxfam says

The charity's research shows that the share of the world's wealth owned by the richest 1% increased from 44% in 2009 to 48% last year.

On current trends, Oxfam says it expects the wealthiest 1% to own more than 50% of the world's wealth by 2016.

Nothing to see here. Move along now drones. (thats what rw media says)

discuss...

Who were you quoting with "take the rest?" I don't see that in your post.

 

[The Rabbi]

As for you, your post is a marvel of unsupported generalizations.
At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?
You are full of empty knee jerk reactions and not much more.
Remind me how you're a conservative. I need a laugh.

Wow, you really missed the point. As you said, this is an international phenomenon and there isn't a government solution. At least you got that much right. So, instead of looking for government solutions, we can be mindful of history as we reflect about the present.

I know, thinking is the epitome of "knee jerk reactions" for you. Forgive me for suggesting such a drastic course of inaction.

Was that supposed to be an answer to my post? Because if it was you failed. Again.
Let's ask again:

At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?

 

[SwimExpert]

As for you, your post is a marvel of unsupported generalizations.
At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?
You are full of empty knee jerk reactions and not much more.
Remind me how you're a conservative. I need a laugh.

Wow, you really missed the point. As you said, this is an international phenomenon and there isn't a government solution. At least you got that much right. So, instead of looking for government solutions, we can be mindful of history as we reflect about the present.

I know, thinking is the epitome of "knee jerk reactions" for you. Forgive me for suggesting such a drastic course of inaction.

Was that supposed to be an answer to my post? Because if it was you failed. Again.
Let's ask again:

At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?

You're trying too hard.

 

[Cassandro]

Unfortunately, the "wealth inequality" canard plays well among the ignorant and envious masses.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Thanks to the media, the 1% are poised to "take the rest"


Nowhere did the article say they were poised to take the rest.

Looks like the liberals, still reeling from their massive defeat at the polls last November, are making up lies as fast as they can about the people the American electorate put into office in their place after booting them out.

As usual, all they can do is lie and scream about the people who won.

 

[Little-Acorn]

At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?

You're trying too hard.

TRANSLATION: I can't answer your questions, because I would have to tell the truth if I did. And that would show I was lying and trying to denigrate you instead of admitting I was wrong.

 

[Cassandro]

Shows such as Fox & Friends who keep their audiences' in a perpetual slumber

by making big deals out of prayer or abortion :yawn: as their great nation is being taken to the cleaners will never announce info like this:

BBC News - Richest 1 to own more than rest of world Oxfam says

The charity's research shows that the share of the world's wealth owned by the richest 1% increased from 44% in 2009 to 48% last year.

On current trends, Oxfam says it expects the wealthiest 1% to own more than 50% of the world's wealth by 2016.

Nothing to see here. Move along now drones. (thats what rw media says)

discuss...

Why don't you explain how Bill Gates is poised to take the rest of the wealth his employees have accumulated?

 

[g5000]

It is a simple fact that wealth is being concentrated at the top, and this is not a good thing. Thomas Jefferson himself warned this was a grave danger to any nation.

There is natural and there is unnatural concentration of wealth. Natural concentration comes from inventing a better mousetrap. Unnatural concentration comes from capturing legislative and regulatory power and bending it to your advantage to the exclusion and harm of others with better business models. A great unleveling of the playing field has occurred.

This MUST be corrected.

Unfortunately, neither party offers any comprehensive solutions that would actually work to solve this problem. The Right pretends there is no problem (as usual), while the Left attempts a one-size-fits-all "tax the rich more" solution which punishes the guilty along with the rich.

If thieves were robbing all the houses on your street, and they had police protection, what would you make of some asshole who said, "I see no problem with these people accumulating more wealth"?

Conversely, what would you make of some other asshole who said, "The answer to this problem is to make people who live in bigger houses pay more taxes"?

Neither one of these approaches will ever solve the problem. The problem requires an unwinding of the legislative tilting of the playing field.

Eliminating the Export-Import Bank, for example.

Eliminating all tax expenditures, for another example.

The assholes who see no problem are about as retarded as it gets, since they are too stupid to realize they are also victims of these thieves. Their pockets are being robbed as they work tirelessly to defend and apologize for the thieves.

The thieves have police protection, folks. Our Congress is completely owned by them. And a D or an R after their name is not indicative of who is guilty and who is innocent. Only a retard who has no clue would think so.

 

[The Rabbi]

At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?

You're trying too hard.

TRANSLATION: I can't answer your questions, because I would have to tell the truth if I did. And that would show I was lying and trying to denigrate you instead of admitting I was wrong.

Bingo You spew slogans you get skewered. Loolks like Mr Expert is out of water.

 

[The Rabbi]

It is a simple fact that wealth is being concentrated at the top, and this is not a good thing. Thomas Jefferson himself warned this was a grave danger to any nation.

There is natural and there is unnatural concentration of wealth. Natural concentration comes from inventing a better mousetrap. Unnatural concentration comes from capturing legislative and regulatory power and bending it to your advantage to the exclusion and harm of others with better business models. A great unleveling of the playing field has occurred.

This MUST be corrected.

Unfortunately, neither party offers any comprehensive solutions that would actually work to solve this problem. The Right pretends there is no problem (as usual), while the Left attempts a one-size-fits-all "tax the rich more" solution which punishes the guilty along with the rich.

If thieves were robbing all the houses on your street, and they had police protection, what would you make of some asshole who said, "I see no problem with these people accumulating more wealth"?

Conversely, what would you make of some other asshole who said, "The answer to this problem is to make people who live in bigger houses pay more taxes"?

Neither one of these approaches will ever solve the problem. The problem requires an unwinding of the legislative tilting of the playing field.

Eliminating the Export-Import Bank, for example.

Eliminating all tax expenditures, for another example.

The assholes who see no problem are about as retarded as it gets, since they are too stupid to realize they are also victims of these thieves. Their pockets are being robbed as they work tirelessly to defend and apologize for the thieves.

The thieves have police protection, folks. Our Congress is completely owned by them. And a D or an R after their name is not indicative of who is guilty and who is innocent. Only a retard who has no clue would think so.

Since thearticle references people all over the world living under different governments it would be hard to make any kind of soilution. Again, I ask what the problem here is. Pointing to Jefferson isnt really an answer.

Yes, crony capitalism is a big problem. But it's a bigger problem elsewhere. Carlos SLim is the richest man in Mexico, possibly North America. But he got there with sweetheart gov't contracts and exclusives.
Frankly promoting pro growth economic policies would solve a lot of problems.

 

[SwimExpert]

At what point do things "go very badly"?
How does this happen?
What does "go very badly" mean exactly?

You're trying too hard.

TRANSLATION: I can't answer your questions, because I would have to tell the truth if I did. And that would show I was lying and trying to denigrate you instead of admitting I was wrong.

Small minds always have a hard time operating with ambiguity. If it isn't reduced to simplistic push-button solutions, it can't be handled by small minds. That is, of course, your problem, not mine.

 

[Dot Com]

Shows such as Fox & Friends who keep their audiences' in a perpetual slumber

by making big deals out of prayer or abortion :yawn: as their great nation is being taken to the cleaners will never announce info like this:

BBC News - Richest 1 to own more than rest of world Oxfam says

The charity's research shows that the share of the world's wealth owned by the richest 1% increased from 44% in 2009 to 48% last year.

On current trends, Oxfam says it expects the wealthiest 1% to own more than 50% of the world's wealth by 2016.

Nothing to see here. Move along now drones. (thats what rw media says)

discuss...

Who were you quoting with "take the rest?" I don't see that in your post.

see it now lolibertarian boi? In 5 short yrs they went from hoarding 44% of the world's wealth to 48%. Why do you people always need to be led around by the hand to see whats right in front of your face?

Unfortunately, the "wealth inequality" canard plays well among the ignorant and envious masses.

You would comprise the former