This 6 minute video sums up the shocking facts of American wealth and inequality

[Cecilie1200]

Man......there are some people here who have dark, ugly hearts.

I am most impressed by the genius who expects people with no money to buy food ( in grain form ) in bulk for discounts. It is just wonderful logic. Arrogant ****.

Were you not aware that Costco and Sam's Club both take food stamps?

 

[koshergrl]

I don't have a freezer except the one attached to my fridge.

My gramma had an ice box, lol. I remember the ice man coming once or twice a week for it.

 

[Moonglow]

Man......there are some people here who have dark, ugly hearts.

I am most impressed by the genius who expects people with no money to buy food ( in grain form ) in bulk for discounts. It is just wonderful logic. Arrogant ****.

Were you not aware that Costco and Sam's Club both take food stamps?

are you aware that Sam's charges for a membership

 

[Cecilie1200]

You misunderstand obesity and poverty. The reason why we have poor obese people is because junk food is cheap. Healthy food is not. Could these people be smarter about what they buy? Sure, but eating healthy is still difficult when you are poor.

Who says healthy food isn't cheaper than junk food? I save money on my grocery bill every month by shopping in the meat and produce sections and cooking my own meals, rather than buying prepackaged crap. The cheapest food in the store is the in-season produce. Always.

Eating healthy isn't "expensive". It isn't "difficult". It just takes determination and gumption. And thanks to our leftists, we have incredibly lazy, helpless poor people in this country.

Its not a political stance. I know some overweight, undereducated, and broke Republicans as well. Our entire society seems to value the easy way out no matter what side they stand on politically.

I didn't say being poor and stupid was a political stance. I said redesigning the society so that it encourages people to be poor and stupid was a political stance. And I'm sorry you don't like it, but it's true. Conservatives don't support that sort of societal programming (and you definitely need to learn the difference between political parties and political stances if you plan to talk to me). Republicans technically don't stand for it, but their biggest problem is that they tend to be too spineless to stand for much of anything.

 

[Moonglow]

I don't have a freezer except the one attached to my fridge.

My gramma had an ice box, lol. I remember the ice man coming once or twice a week for it.

the ice or the box?

 

[Moonglow]

I became poor from working, wow, I know it sounds absurd, but If I had been a bum I would probably still have a back to work with.

 

[koshergrl]

What you have is the breeder/taker class arguing that if they have to pay for anything, save for anything, think ahead at all, or sacrifice anything..that is a violation of their right to have everything provided to them, free of charge.

 

[koshergrl]

I don't have a freezer except the one attached to my fridge.

My gramma had an ice box, lol. I remember the ice man coming once or twice a week for it.

the ice or the box?

He came with ice for the ice box...a big block of it that went into a little cabinet under the box itself.

That's an oooollllllddddd memory.

Here's the problem with using a freezer for storage....whether you're poor OR wealthy....power outages, or shut offs....also mechanical/electrical failures in the freezer itself.

A small freezer attached to a fridge is perfectly adequate for freezing what a family of 4 or 5 needs. Other options for food storage are dehydration, smoking, and CANNING. Again, just like my grandparents stored food (without freezers. Or electricity or running water, in the case of my maternal grandparents).

 

[Billy000]

You know what's shocking? Throwing up a frigging video as your whole post, with no summarization or commentary or independent thought of your own - as a thread opener, no less - and expecting anyone to care enough to watch it, let alone continue on and provide the discussion on it you were incapable of.

If you can't tell me exactly, specifically, what is wrong with "American wealth inequality", rather than simply expecting everyone to assume as a given that it IS wrong and bad, then you have nothing to say to me on the subject, and there is nothing to discuss until that question is answered. Don't worry if you can't, though. Every other leftist economics pretender on this board has run away from that question like a scalded *****, so I won't expect any better of you.

No, what's pathetic is that you look for reasons to be a complete **** in your first post rather than having a mature discussion. If you don't like the way I do my threads, then don't post in them. Ignore it. Don't be a **** for the sake of being ****. It's very childish. Grow the **** up. This forum is for adults.

Because you are too stupid to understand why i have a problem with American inequality from watching this simple video, and because you are too lazy to read any other of my posts in this thread elaborating my point, then i don't even see the point in wasting my time explaining it to you.

Seriously, chick, you have issues. Frankly, I feel sorry for you.

Thank you for so clearly demonstrating your hatred of women and your utter worthlessness on earth as anything but a whining douchebag. That "C" word just screamed, "I'm a ******* moron! I have nothing to say!"

Of course, starting a thread with a video and no commentary did the same thing, so at least you're consistent.

You might want to work on developing a more gracious surrender technique, but I will go ahead and accept your admission that you have utterly and completely lost all debates on this message board for all time.

FLUSH!

Right me saying a four letter word obviously means I hate women. It's a word. Get over it. It's no more evil then any other word. It's not like you have the maturity high ground either way. Give it a rest.

Yeah, that's it. I surrender.

Do you seriously not understand the topic of my thread?

 

[koshergrl]

You don't have a topic. You're a propagandist. You just mindlessly repeat lies in the hopes that people will believe them, while at the same time hiding your own culpability like the mindless coward you, yourself, are.

 

[Grandma]

The right wingers aren't going to address this because they'll let the defenseless suffer before standing up to someone waving cash.

 

[koshergrl]

What's to address?

 

[Brain357]

I wonder why all the countries that I wouldn't want to live in have really bad wealth inequality?
File:GINI retouched legend.gif - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Strangely enough those with less inequality also seem to have the happiest people.
Norway - In Photos: The World's Happiest And Saddest Countries - Forbes

Crime rates also seem to be higher where there is more inequality.
Crime Index by Country 2013

But I guess CEOs just work 10X harder than they did in the 70's and are earning what they are getting? No greed or crony capitalism here...

 

[NightFox]

Nice video for those that don't have enough intellectual curiosity to bother to acquaint themselves with current economic realities, it essentially puts what has been patently obvious to even the most casual students of economics for a long time into cartoon form. However the author then goes on to imply that some form of market interventionism is the prescription to solve the problem (i.e. "We certainly don't have to go all the way to socialism to find something that is fair for hard working Americans"). Apparently it never occurred to the author that the basis of the gross inequality of wealth IS market interventionism and it's source has been and still is government.

The top tier of wealth holders got there and remain there largely because the have the influence to utilize government to skew the field in their favor, far from being the fairy tale knight in shining armor government has become an accomplice and a servant to those monied interests that the class warriors enjoy railing against. The author of the video stumbles across an indicator of this reality when he points out that inequality has been accelerating in recent decades but then it apparently escapes his notice the growth, power and centralization of government has accelerated right along with it, a correlation worth investigating? naw .... it's just a coincidence, right? correlation doesn't imply causation especially when you don't bother to investigate it further by looking at the details below the surface.

What should be a patently obvious starting point for any person that actually cares about the whys, hows and wherefores of wealth inequality is the role that economic central planning plays in it's creation, it's not that hard to validate, just pick up any piece of legislation and examine the details of its contents and the market favoritism becomes glaring. Those on the left scream about tax policy and how those at the top don't "pay their fair share" because they apparently don't realize that those at the top know how to game the system, raise their taxes to the point where it becomes cheaper to shelter or shift and they are perfectly capable of doing it, make it too onerous and they'll take their business elsewhere along with 1/3 of the nations wealth. So you're never going to tax inequality out of existence, you're not going to regulate it away either since those people at the top are the ones writing the "regulations", that path just invites further market favoritism.

There is only one path to dealing with economic inequality and that is for government to act in the role that it should have been performing all along, the role of an impartial referee whose function is to ensure that ALL market participates behave in a fair and honest manner, that ALL market participants play by the SAME rules, that all market participants bear an equal (that means flat rate) burden for government operating costs, that ALL market participants bear the full consequences of their choices. What we have right now is nothing like this, the government is playing the role of a economic favoritism auctioneer where goodies get passed out to the highest bidders (and guess who that is?). The middle class and the poor in the mean time are being transformed into nothing more than subsistence level serfs who are only important when election time rolls around or when they can be used as props to advance some narrative supporting ever more interventionism.

 

[Stephanie]

The right wingers aren't going to address this because they'll let the defenseless suffer before standing up to someone waving cash.

people like you and your fellow libs-Democrats can take the bs and shove it where the sun don't shine...I've paid into WELFARE for 50 years...I'm also a smoker so I pay for childrens HEALTH CARE, etc thanks to you dear leader who raised the cigarette tax higher than any President..................and guess who the cigarette taxes hurt the worst? THE POOR...
so don't you dare accuse Republicans of letting the defenseless suffer..and from what I've been reading people have ADDRESSED THIS...you just ignored all that so you come with baseless and hateful remark about republicans
You Democrats supposedly care for the poor, as long as it's with OTHER peoples monies, (taxpayers) then you beat your chest crowing, SEE how much we care ..
NOW you want to about the DEFENSELESS? You libs show how you are the ones who let the defenseless suffer...............YOU AND YOUR PARTY supports ABORTION and the killing of one's child, justifying infanticide, as a woman choice...

 

[editec]

Stephanie?

the DEMS are quite nearly as responsible for the wealth inequity in the USA as the Reps are.

I say nearly because its the Repbs love of tax breaks for billionaires that makes most of the difference.

FREE TRADE (the root source of the problem) that's as much on the DEMS and REPS, amiga.

 

[RKMBrown]

I love the way we have changed the definition of "starvation" to "obese" lol.

The reality that our poor people aren't starving, and in fact quite obviously are rolling in calories and food, does not jibe with the hysterical "OMG EVERYBODY'S STARVING" meme...so suddenly, starvation looks different in the US than it does anywhere in the world. Suddenly, if you are starving in the US you are OBESE!

It's right up there with "we risk women's lives to kill babies because it's GOOD for them."

QFT

The modern liberal's brain... it just doesn't work right.

 

[RKMBrown]

Stephanie?

the DEMS are quite nearly as responsible for the wealth inequity in the USA as the Reps are.

I say nearly because its the Repbs love of tax breaks for billionaires that makes most of the difference.

FREE TRADE (the root source of the problem) that's as much on the DEMS and REPS, amiga.

50% of Americans get so many tax breaks that they don't even pay federal income tax.

And you are pissed that the folks who are paying the bulk of personal income taxes are richer than the folks who pay no taxes?

The purpose of taxes should not be wealth "redistribution." Therefore the goal of taxation should not be to right some ungodly wrong that is allowing the rich to have high income.

We have anti-monopoly laws in this country. If the corporate board rooms are acting together as an oligopoly to set their own salaries against the owner's permission, then it is the duty of this government to break that up by giving the owners of the company a say in the pay structure of their company. In cases where the CEO is the majority owner... pick a finger it's his company, his money, get over it.

 

[Stephanie]

Stephanie?

the DEMS are quite nearly as responsible for the wealth inequity in the USA as the Reps are.

I say nearly because its the Repbs love of tax breaks for billionaires that makes most of the difference.

FREE TRADE (the root source of the problem) that's as much on the DEMS and REPS, amiga.

I can agree with this..

 

[Skull Pilot]

So called wealth inequality does not matter.

What matters is mobility and there is more mobility in the lower and middle classes that there is in the top 10%.

You all seem to think that you can't make any more money than you do now because of some fictional inequality.