Top 8% Own 85%

[Wilbur Right]

am talking abut changing the tax code I don't know how many times I have to tell you that

It needs to be changed so everyone with an income pays the same percentage of that income in taxes

I know it's hard for you but try to think of things other than what we have today that's how we advance

Change the channel asshole. No on e is proposing to do what you want. No matter how bad you want it.

Why you have such a hard time with reality?

 

[Skull Pilot]

am talking abut changing the tax code I don't know how many times I have to tell you that

It needs to be changed so everyone with an income pays the same percentage of that income in taxes

I know it's hard for you but try to think of things other than what we have today that's how we advance

Change the channel asshole. No on e is proposing to do what you want. No matter how bad you want it.

Why you have such a hard time with reality?

Ah yes and if someone else doesn't think of it or start the process for you you can't muster the brain cells to discuss it

 

[Wilbur Right]

Ah yes and if someone else doesn't think of it or start the process for you you can't muster the brain cells to discuss it

You know what skull. At least I am smart enough to u understand that giving a large tax cut to the wealthiest and raising taxes substantially for the poorest is a non starter.

The fact that you cling to that fantasy like a drowning man to a life raft means you have lost touch with reality.

Also makes you boring as hell. But fun to give you a hard time.

Ah well, I have some fantasy work to do on my fantasy rental property, so carry on without me. K?

 

[M14 Shooter]

This is really screwed up...and we Americans fight among ourselves over stupid things. All the while the elites are screwing us. When will we wake up and take action?

Take action..... and use the government to seize property, without compensation, from people that have committed no crime?
How do you suppose that is in any way constitutional?

WTF are you talking about?

I did not state or suggest any such thing.

I was not asking you, specifically.

Okay but I don't think anyone in the thread suggested anything close you what you are claiming.

How else do you fairly redistribute that wealth, if not by seizing it?

 

[Brain357]

Anyone who understands capitalism knows that holds down wages. Go learn something moron. You are a crony capitalist.

It doesn't those were non compete clauses between private entities if two or 3 businesses want to enter into a non compete it's none of your business and those employees are free to fine employment anywhere in the thousands of other companies that can use their skills

It is illegal for a reason moron. You think they illegally colluded for no reason? You really are too stupid to debate.

And it had absolutely no effect on wages

All it was was an agreement not to poach employees

And that agreement effects wages moron. When people are poached they make more money. You don't change jobs for less money. You really don't understand capitalism.

Why do you think they illegally colluded professor?

Those people could have gone to hundreds if not thousands of other companies and gotten paid more so no it was no big deal

If every single IT company in the states was involved you'd have an issue but you don't

We only know who got caught, and they are very big companies. Just admit you are wrong already.

 

[gipper]

This is really screwed up...and we Americans fight among ourselves over stupid things. All the while the elites are screwing us. When will we wake up and take action?

Take action..... and use the government to seize property, without compensation, from people that have committed no crime?
How do you suppose that is in any way constitutional?

WTF are you talking about?

I did not state or suggest any such thing.

I was not asking you, specifically.

Okay but I don't think anyone in the thread suggested anything close you what you are claiming.

How else do you fairly redistribute that wealth, if not by seizing it?

I have no desire to redistribute wealth. NONE....NONE....NONE....get it?????? I NEVER suggested such tyrannical foolishness, but apparently some think that anyone who opposes the current fraudulent system that has resulted in outrageous income inequality, must want socialism. WTF!!!

This from the same author I posted in the OP, makes sense to me...

Since all these distortions originate from the Fed, the only solution is to abolish the Fed. Those who have absorbed the ceaseless propaganda believe that an economy needs a central bank to create money and manage interest rates.

This is simply wrong. The U.S. Treasury (a branch of government actually described by the Constitution, unlike the Fed) could print money just as it borrows money. Should a liquidity crisis squeeze rates higher, the Treasury has the means to create liquidity and make it available to the legitimate financial system.

All the Fed's regulatory powers were power-grabbed from legitimate government agencies defined by the Constitution.

The Federal Reserve is the primary engine of income/wealth inequality in the U.S.Eliminate "free money for cronies," bailouts of the "too big to fail" banks that own the Fed, manipulation of markets, the purchase of impaired private assets at high prices, and all the other tools of financialization the Fed wields to enforce its grip on the nation's throat--in other words, abolish the Fed--and the neofeudal structure that feeds inequality will vanish along with the feudal lords that enforced it.

We don't need to "fix" things as much as remove the obstacles that are blocking the way forward. The Federal Reserve is the primary obstacle to reducing income/wealth inequality. Those who support the Fed are supporting a neofeudal arrangement that widens the income/wealth gap by its very existence.

 

[Brain357]

Take action..... and use the government to seize property, without compensation, from people that have committed no crime?
How do you suppose that is in any way constitutional?

WTF are you talking about?

I did not state or suggest any such thing.

I was not asking you, specifically.

Okay but I don't think anyone in the thread suggested anything close you what you are claiming.

How else do you fairly redistribute that wealth, if not by seizing it?

I have no desire to redistribute wealth. NONE....NONE....NONE....get it?????? I NEVER suggested such tyrannical foolishness, but apparently some think that anyone who opposes the current fraudulent system that has resulted in outrageous income inequality, must want socialism. WTF!!!

This from the same author I posted in the OP, makes sense to me...

Since all these distortions originate from the Fed, the only solution is to abolish the Fed. Those who have absorbed the ceaseless propaganda believe that an economy needs a central bank to create money and manage interest rates.

This is simply wrong. The U.S. Treasury (a branch of government actually described by the Constitution, unlike the Fed) could print money just as it borrows money. Should a liquidity crisis squeeze rates higher, the Treasury has the means to create liquidity and make it available to the legitimate financial system.

All the Fed's regulatory powers were power-grabbed from legitimate government agencies defined by the Constitution.

The Federal Reserve is the primary engine of income/wealth inequality in the U.S.Eliminate "free money for cronies," bailouts of the "too big to fail" banks that own the Fed, manipulation of markets, the purchase of impaired private assets at high prices, and all the other tools of financialization the Fed wields to enforce its grip on the nation's throat--in other words, abolish the Fed--and the neofeudal structure that feeds inequality will vanish along with the feudal lords that enforced it.

We don't need to "fix" things as much as remove the obstacles that are blocking the way forward. The Federal Reserve is the primary obstacle to reducing income/wealth inequality. Those who support the Fed are supporting a neofeudal arrangement that widens the income/wealth gap by its very existence.

These people don't seem to bother actually reading your responses.

 

[gipper]

WTF are you talking about?

I did not state or suggest any such thing.

I was not asking you, specifically.

Okay but I don't think anyone in the thread suggested anything close you what you are claiming.

How else do you fairly redistribute that wealth, if not by seizing it?

I have no desire to redistribute wealth. NONE....NONE....NONE....get it?????? I NEVER suggested such tyrannical foolishness, but apparently some think that anyone who opposes the current fraudulent system that has resulted in outrageous income inequality, must want socialism. WTF!!!

This from the same author I posted in the OP, makes sense to me...

Since all these distortions originate from the Fed, the only solution is to abolish the Fed. Those who have absorbed the ceaseless propaganda believe that an economy needs a central bank to create money and manage interest rates.

This is simply wrong. The U.S. Treasury (a branch of government actually described by the Constitution, unlike the Fed) could print money just as it borrows money. Should a liquidity crisis squeeze rates higher, the Treasury has the means to create liquidity and make it available to the legitimate financial system.

All the Fed's regulatory powers were power-grabbed from legitimate government agencies defined by the Constitution.

The Federal Reserve is the primary engine of income/wealth inequality in the U.S.Eliminate "free money for cronies," bailouts of the "too big to fail" banks that own the Fed, manipulation of markets, the purchase of impaired private assets at high prices, and all the other tools of financialization the Fed wields to enforce its grip on the nation's throat--in other words, abolish the Fed--and the neofeudal structure that feeds inequality will vanish along with the feudal lords that enforced it.

We don't need to "fix" things as much as remove the obstacles that are blocking the way forward. The Federal Reserve is the primary obstacle to reducing income/wealth inequality. Those who support the Fed are supporting a neofeudal arrangement that widens the income/wealth gap by its very existence.

These people don't seem to bother actually reading your responses.

You might be right.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Take action..... and use the government to seize property, without compensation, from people that have committed no crime?
How do you suppose that is in any way constitutional?

WTF are you talking about?

I did not state or suggest any such thing.

I was not asking you, specifically.

Okay but I don't think anyone in the thread suggested anything close you what you are claiming.

How else do you fairly redistribute that wealth, if not by seizing it?

I have no desire to redistribute wealth. NONE....NONE....NONE....get it?????? I NEVER suggested such tyrannical foolishness, but apparently some think that anyone who opposes the current fraudulent system that has resulted in outrageous income inequality, must want socialism. WTF!!!

This from the same author I posted in the OP, makes sense to me...

Since all these distortions originate from the Fed, the only solution is to abolish the Fed. Those who have absorbed the ceaseless propaganda believe that an economy needs a central bank to create money and manage interest rates.

This is simply wrong. The U.S. Treasury (a branch of government actually described by the Constitution, unlike the Fed) could print money just as it borrows money. Should a liquidity crisis squeeze rates higher, the Treasury has the means to create liquidity and make it available to the legitimate financial system.

All the Fed's regulatory powers were power-grabbed from legitimate government agencies defined by the Constitution.

The Federal Reserve is the primary engine of income/wealth inequality in the U.S.Eliminate "free money for cronies," bailouts of the "too big to fail" banks that own the Fed, manipulation of markets, the purchase of impaired private assets at high prices, and all the other tools of financialization the Fed wields to enforce its grip on the nation's throat--in other words, abolish the Fed--and the neofeudal structure that feeds inequality will vanish along with the feudal lords that enforced it.

We don't need to "fix" things as much as remove the obstacles that are blocking the way forward. The Federal Reserve is the primary obstacle to reducing income/wealth inequality. Those who support the Fed are supporting a neofeudal arrangement that widens the income/wealth gap by its very existence.

This is simply wrong. The U.S. Treasury (a branch of government actually described by the Constitution, unlike the Fed) could print money just as it borrows money. Should a liquidity crisis squeeze rates higher, the Treasury has the means to create liquidity and make it available to the legitimate financial system.

Why would the same actions taken by the Treasury, instead of the Fed, be better?

Eliminate "free money for cronies,"

Free? Why do you think any money is free to anyone?

the purchase of impaired private assets at high prices,

Which impaired private assets did they buy?

The Federal Reserve is the primary obstacle to reducing income/wealth inequality.

How will eliminating the Fed give more wealth or income to the poorer among us?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Ah yes and if someone else doesn't think of it or start the process for you you can't muster the brain cells to discuss it

You know what skull. At least I am smart enough to u understand that giving a large tax cut to the wealthiest and raising taxes substantially for the poorest is a non starter.

The fact that you cling to that fantasy like a drowning man to a life raft means you have lost touch with reality.

Also makes you boring as hell. But fun to give you a hard time.

Ah well, I have some fantasy work to do on my fantasy rental property, so carry on without me. K?

A flat tax would keep the lowest tax bracket virtually untouched the only difference is that the people who have had a free ride will now be paying a fair share of their income to taxes

It's funny how a guy who can't think of possibilities besides what someone else writes down and puts under his nose to parrot back can call anyone else boring

 

[Skull Pilot]

It doesn't those were non compete clauses between private entities if two or 3 businesses want to enter into a non compete it's none of your business and those employees are free to fine employment anywhere in the thousands of other companies that can use their skills

It is illegal for a reason moron. You think they illegally colluded for no reason? You really are too stupid to debate.

And it had absolutely no effect on wages

All it was was an agreement not to poach employees

And that agreement effects wages moron. When people are poached they make more money. You don't change jobs for less money. You really don't understand capitalism.

Why do you think they illegally colluded professor?

Those people could have gone to hundreds if not thousands of other companies and gotten paid more so no it was no big deal

If every single IT company in the states was involved you'd have an issue but you don't

We only know who got caught, and they are very big companies. Just admit you are wrong already.

I'm not because you have yet to prove the noncompete agreement suppressed any wages of anyone

 

[Brain357]

It is illegal for a reason moron. You think they illegally colluded for no reason? You really are too stupid to debate.

And it had absolutely no effect on wages

All it was was an agreement not to poach employees

And that agreement effects wages moron. When people are poached they make more money. You don't change jobs for less money. You really don't understand capitalism.

Why do you think they illegally colluded professor?

Those people could have gone to hundreds if not thousands of other companies and gotten paid more so no it was no big deal

If every single IT company in the states was involved you'd have an issue but you don't

We only know who got caught, and they are very big companies. Just admit you are wrong already.

I'm not because you have yet to prove the noncompete agreement suppressed any wages of anyone

You aren't worth debating. Doesn't matter how many time you are proven wrong you just deny and deny. You really are an idiot if you can't figure out that suppresses wages. Enjoy your realm of stupidity.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And it had absolutely no effect on wages

All it was was an agreement not to poach employees

And that agreement effects wages moron. When people are poached they make more money. You don't change jobs for less money. You really don't understand capitalism.

Why do you think they illegally colluded professor?

Those people could have gone to hundreds if not thousands of other companies and gotten paid more so no it was no big deal

If every single IT company in the states was involved you'd have an issue but you don't

We only know who got caught, and they are very big companies. Just admit you are wrong already.

I'm not because you have yet to prove the noncompete agreement suppressed any wages of anyone

You aren't worth debating. Doesn't matter how many time you are proven wrong you just deny and deny. You really are an idiot if you can't figure out how that suppresses wages. Enjoy your realm of stupidity.

You haven't told me how much anyone's income was decreased that is your entire argument

It was a speculative law suit that the companies settles because it was cheaper than going to trial that is all it was

 

[Brain357]

The companies on the other end of the poaching, of course, lose knowledge and skills when their employees leave. Moreover, replacing employees creates labor competition and drives wages higher, and the fear of losing employees forces a firm to plan ahead for something that may or may not happen. So some companies have responded with aggressive, or even illegal, antipoaching strategies. In April 2015, a judge approved a $415 million settlement between several technology companies—including Apple and Google—and the approximately 64,000 tech employees they conspired not to hire from each other.

http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/poach-our-employees-please

 

[Skull Pilot]

The companies on the other end of the poaching, of course, lose knowledge and skills when their employees leave. Moreover, replacing employees creates labor competition and drives wages higher, and the fear of losing employees forces a firm to plan ahead for something that may or may not happen. So some companies have responded with aggressive, or even illegal, antipoaching strategies. In April 2015, a judge approved a $415 million settlement between several technology companies—including Apple and Google—and the approximately 64,000 tech employees they conspired not to hire from each other.

The suit assumes that 4 companies make up the ENTIRE market in IT

Sorry but that's not true those people had thousands of other companies to choose from

The only way you would be right is if every single IT company entered into non compete deals and that didn't happen and never will happen

 

[Brain357]

The companies on the other end of the poaching, of course, lose knowledge and skills when their employees leave. Moreover, replacing employees creates labor competition and drives wages higher, and the fear of losing employees forces a firm to plan ahead for something that may or may not happen. So some companies have responded with aggressive, or even illegal, antipoaching strategies. In April 2015, a judge approved a $415 million settlement between several technology companies—including Apple and Google—and the approximately 64,000 tech employees they conspired not to hire from each other.

The suit assumes that 4 companies make up the ENTIRE market in IT

Sorry but that's not true those people had thousands of other companies to choose from

The only way you would be right is if every single IT company entered into non compete deals and that didn't happen and never will happen

Like it states, poaching drives up wages. They colluded against poaching. When it is many of the largest companies that holds down wages. You are dismissed moron.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The companies on the other end of the poaching, of course, lose knowledge and skills when their employees leave. Moreover, replacing employees creates labor competition and drives wages higher, and the fear of losing employees forces a firm to plan ahead for something that may or may not happen. So some companies have responded with aggressive, or even illegal, antipoaching strategies. In April 2015, a judge approved a $415 million settlement between several technology companies—including Apple and Google—and the approximately 64,000 tech employees they conspired not to hire from each other.

The suit assumes that 4 companies make up the ENTIRE market in IT

Sorry but that's not true those people had thousands of other companies to choose from

The only way you would be right is if every single IT company entered into non compete deals and that didn't happen and never will happen

Like it states, poaching drives up wages. They colluded against poaching. When it is many of the largest companies that holds down wages. You are dismissed moron.

No business is required to try and take the employees from another business if the recruiting practices prohibit actively cold calling employees of other companies so what?

 

[Andylusion]

People who live paycheck to paycheck live on their take home pay not their one refund check a year

And paycheck to paycheck just doesn't let them save much. So a couple thousand dollars all at once. It's a big deal and let's them make a major purchase without debt. Or pay a big bill that was a problem. Or pay security deposit and first month for better housing.

Saving 40 dollars a month just won't get them there.

No one plans their budget around their tax return

People who live payday to payday or hand to mouth plan their budget on their tax return.

Really? You are crazy. You are telling me, that people plan their monthly budget, around a one time a year check, that they don't even know how much is going to be in it?

If they do...... That's why they are poor. That's insane talk. In October they are planning out how to get through the money based on "Well my tax return in march should be....." If people are actually doing that, then that's why they are poor and living pay check to pay check.

 

[Andylusion]

The companies on the other end of the poaching, of course, lose knowledge and skills when their employees leave. Moreover, replacing employees creates labor competition and drives wages higher, and the fear of losing employees forces a firm to plan ahead for something that may or may not happen. So some companies have responded with aggressive, or even illegal, antipoaching strategies. In April 2015, a judge approved a $415 million settlement between several technology companies—including Apple and Google—and the approximately 64,000 tech employees they conspired not to hire from each other.

The suit assumes that 4 companies make up the ENTIRE market in IT

Sorry but that's not true those people had thousands of other companies to choose from

The only way you would be right is if every single IT company entered into non compete deals and that didn't happen and never will happen

Like it states, poaching drives up wages. They colluded against poaching. When it is many of the largest companies that holds down wages. You are dismissed moron.

I don't see companies poaching low-wage workers. Poaching usually happens in high-end jobs, where the people are already paid really good money. I don't see McDonald, poaching Chic-fil-a cashiers.

The fact poaching exists suggests that they are doing it, regardless of these "colluding". Not seeing you have much of a point here.

 

[Brain357]

The companies on the other end of the poaching, of course, lose knowledge and skills when their employees leave. Moreover, replacing employees creates labor competition and drives wages higher, and the fear of losing employees forces a firm to plan ahead for something that may or may not happen. So some companies have responded with aggressive, or even illegal, antipoaching strategies. In April 2015, a judge approved a $415 million settlement between several technology companies—including Apple and Google—and the approximately 64,000 tech employees they conspired not to hire from each other.

The suit assumes that 4 companies make up the ENTIRE market in IT

Sorry but that's not true those people had thousands of other companies to choose from

The only way you would be right is if every single IT company entered into non compete deals and that didn't happen and never will happen

Like it states, poaching drives up wages. They colluded against poaching. When it is many of the largest companies that holds down wages. You are dismissed moron.

I don't see companies poaching low-wage workers. Poaching usually happens in high-end jobs, where the people are already paid really good money. I don't see McDonald, poaching Chic-fil-a cashiers.

The fact poaching exists suggests that they are doing it, regardless of these "colluding". Not seeing you have much of a point here.

You seem lost. Skull was claiming poaching doesn't increase wages. It obviously does. And these companies were caught illegally colluding to not poach. They were colluding to hold wages down. Not good capitalism, crony capitalism.