Wealth inequality-how it affects the economy

[MaggieMae]

You know............I like the way the Japanese do it. A CEO cannot make more that 100 times the salary of their lowest employee.

Wanna stimulate the economy? Tell the greedy ***** at the top to stop shipping jobs overseas, and actually bring the factories over here.

Oh wait......can't happen.......the CEO's mistress needs a new Bentley to keep her quiet.

Perhaps if the US didn't have one of the highest (39.9%) tax rates in the world, the jobs would stay here.
The Tax Foundation - National and State Corporate Income Tax Rates, U.S. States and OECD Countries, 2009

It doesn't matter what the tax "rate" is, the corporations will find a way not to pay anyway. Do I need to re-post the link?

 

[MaggieMae]

OK. And? They worked for a company. People in the company including top management were corrupt. Do you expect everyone at Enron should have gone to jail?
The people who perpretrated the fraud were jailed and fined and today are hardly wealthy people. So talk of how the rich got that way by screwing everyone else is merely class envy and based on falsehood.

\\so the fact that many ENRON executives got to walk away with their parachutes intact while COUNTLESS employees and retirees with utility company stock in their retirement portfolios were made PENNILESSS is OK with you?

Does the phrase "life is unfair" mean anything to you?
Investing involves risk. I am sorry people didnt dump their Enron stock when it was soaring. I personally looked at the stock and walked away from it. It tanked 6 months later.
The executives who worked for the company largely did so in good faith and ignorant of what was going on. Should they be punished for doing their jobs?

So when are businessmen sitting on a trillion bucks going to start taking risks and rehiring?

By your logic, only individuals struggling to make it should be willing to "take risks." But LEAVE MY WEALTH ALONE!!!

 

[Jeremy]

OK. And? They worked for a company. People in the company including top management were corrupt. Do you expect everyone at Enron should have gone to jail?
The people who perpretrated the fraud were jailed and fined and today are hardly wealthy people. So talk of how the rich got that way by screwing everyone else is merely class envy and based on falsehood.

Enron screwed all of its employees and you're feeling sorry for the ones who did it because now they're in the poor house?

The only one I feel sorry for is you because your brain clearly isn't functioning. You drop in posts that are wrong, poorly argued, and make no sense and then when called on it you ignore the question.

My question was fair and honest. And I would LOVE to hear your answer. What would "fair" wealth inequality be? Do you have percentages you would like to throw out to us?

 

[MaggieMae]

All 'men' are "created" equal. After the point of a persons "creation" or conception it's fair game.

so you believe we should live in a dickensian nightmare where there are a few rich people and the rest of the country is poor?

do the words banana republic mean anything to you?

You evince the kind of misunderstanding of society regularly found in the left's adherents.

1. What is the definition of poor? Is same to be compared to needs, or wants? To the world or to one's neighbor?

2. Where does personal responsibility enter into the result?

3. Why does your post seem to imply that once poor, one is relegated to the same level of existence forever. This suposition is, of course, provably false.

4. Are you familiar with the concept of capitalism? I recommend that you study the recent history of Estonia vis-a-vis Finland.

5. Left-wing social programs? From Charles Murray, Losing Ground: American Social Policy 1950-1980: “In 1964 we declared ‘War on Poverty.” In 1968 13% of Americans were poor. From 1968 to 1980 we increased social welfare payments by 400%. In 1980 13% of Americans were poor.”

6. Would I be correct in believing that you would subscribe to The American Victimization Thesis:

a. During the ‘Bush Years’ taxes on the wealthy have been slashed.
b. If your parents were rich, you’ll be rich. Otherwise, no chance.
c. Government is the answer to whatever ails us.
d. Ambition, determination, grit and sweat count for nothing.
e. Neither personal responsibility nor merit are necessary.
f. Whatever your personal failures, shortcomings, and weaknesses, your troubles are caused by anyone and everyone except youself.
g. It’s not that I don’t want to succeed, it’s that I can’t succeed.
h. The deck is always stacked against me.
i. Anyone who is poor or black or short or old or handicapped or female or gay or uncoordinated shouldn’t even try.
j. The Constitution guaranteed me ‘Life, Liberty, and Happiness!’
k. The government must make sure we are all equal in everything.
l. The government should make poor people rich and rich people poor!
m. “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Kanye West.
n. There must be more I can complain about!

Nice job of cherry picking to justify your usual extremism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

so you believe we should live in a dickensian nightmare where there are a few rich people and the rest of the country is poor?

do the words banana republic mean anything to you?

You evince the kind of misunderstanding of society regularly found in the left's adherents.

1. What is the definition of poor? Is same to be compared to needs, or wants? To the world or to one's neighbor?

2. Where does personal responsibility enter into the result?

3. Why does your post seem to imply that once poor, one is relegated to the same level of existence forever. This suposition is, of course, provably false.

4. Are you familiar with the concept of capitalism? I recommend that you study the recent history of Estonia vis-a-vis Finland.

5. Left-wing social programs? From Charles Murray, Losing Ground: American Social Policy 1950-1980: “In 1964 we declared ‘War on Poverty.” In 1968 13% of Americans were poor. From 1968 to 1980 we increased social welfare payments by 400%. In 1980 13% of Americans were poor.”

6. Would I be correct in believing that you would subscribe to The American Victimization Thesis:

a. During the ‘Bush Years’ taxes on the wealthy have been slashed.
b. If your parents were rich, you’ll be rich. Otherwise, no chance.
c. Government is the answer to whatever ails us.
d. Ambition, determination, grit and sweat count for nothing.
e. Neither personal responsibility nor merit are necessary.
f. Whatever your personal failures, shortcomings, and weaknesses, your troubles are caused by anyone and everyone except youself.
g. It’s not that I don’t want to succeed, it’s that I can’t succeed.
h. The deck is always stacked against me.
i. Anyone who is poor or black or short or old or handicapped or female or gay or uncoordinated shouldn’t even try.
j. The Constitution guaranteed me ‘Life, Liberty, and Happiness!’
k. The government must make sure we are all equal in everything.
l. The government should make poor people rich and rich people poor!
m. “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Kanye West.
n. There must be more I can complain about!

Nice job of cherry picking to justify your usual extremism.

Sorry I can't return the compliment, as you have done the usual left-wing deflection as you are not able to respond in a coherent dispositive counter...


Were there not ANY of the items in my post that you felt equipped to counter??

Not one???

Simply shout 'extremist'....
That validates your leftist street creds, I guess.

 

[MaggieMae]

[...]The executives who worked for the company largely did so in good faith and ignorant of what was going on. Should they be punished for doing their jobs?

Rabbi,

By way of simplified analogy:

You answer an ad for a salesman at Lay & Skilling Automotive Salvage, Inc., where you're told the job pays no salary but you get a 20% commission on everything you sell -- and Lay & Skilling sells at 25% below any competitor. Wow! So you go to work for Lay & Skilling, selling everything from used Lexus transmissions to used Ford headlights and in just one year you manage to earn $250,000.

One day the cops walk in, bust the operation and you are charged with participation in a criminal enterprise. You've been selling stolen goods. You say you didn't know. The judge says that doesn't matter. You were selling stolen goods. Property that belongs to other people. And now those people must be compensated. So those assets you've managed to accumulate during the time you worked at Lay & Skilling's chop shop must be seized and distributed among the victims of the criminal enterprise you participated in. Because you claim to be a schmuck who "didn't know" is nothing but a meaningless waste of the court's time. And you're lucky you're not going to prison with Lay & Skilling.

But in spite of the foregoing circumstances, the brokers at Enron walked away with the money they helped to steal from thousands of trusting investors who simply and legitimately didn't know they were dealing with a criminal enterprise.

Even if you're willing to believe that it never entered the mind of one who knows enough about the used auto parts business to make $250,000 in a year that some or all of those auto parts might be stolen, do you think it's fair that they be allowed to keep the fruit from a stolen tree?

Totally inapt analogy.
Anyway, someone who gets hired by a company, works according to his agreement and has no idea the company is doing anything illegal should suffer why? How about all the people who worked for AIG? Should some guy underwriting insurance policies have his salary docked because someone in the London office was dealing in insider trading?

You must be the only person left alive who DEFENDS Enron. And yes, the employees of AIG got screwed, too, as did the employees of Lehman Brothers. Which only brings home the point that YOU are wrong. GREED of that magnitude has no place in the hearts of any sane American.

 

[MaggieMae]

How was he a "proven fraud"? Please post any of that.

Not only was it earlier proven last spring that the tape by the man posing as a client was heavily doctored, and aside from the fact that he has since been sued, the truth of the incident is that the ACORN employee took down the information and immediately called the police. Of course you wouldn't know that because Fox won't report on it. But Rachel Maddow did.

Rachel Maddow Exposes More Fox News Video Editing Fraud - wpparty.com

Don;t take this the wrong way, but what drugs are you taking? Someone makes a statement about Joe the Plumber. I query it. And you respond with a link about the Acorn tapes.
Helloooo????

Well may God strike me down. I made a boo-boo and posted the wrong information against the comment. Must be you never make simple mistakes, either, just adding to our wonderment of your perfect being.

 

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi,

By way of simplified analogy:

You answer an ad for a salesman at Lay & Skilling Automotive Salvage, Inc., where you're told the job pays no salary but you get a 20% commission on everything you sell -- and Lay & Skilling sells at 25% below any competitor. Wow! So you go to work for Lay & Skilling, selling everything from used Lexus transmissions to used Ford headlights and in just one year you manage to earn $250,000.

One day the cops walk in, bust the operation and you are charged with participation in a criminal enterprise. You've been selling stolen goods. You say you didn't know. The judge says that doesn't matter. You were selling stolen goods. Property that belongs to other people. And now those people must be compensated. So those assets you've managed to accumulate during the time you worked at Lay & Skilling's chop shop must be seized and distributed among the victims of the criminal enterprise you participated in. Because you claim to be a schmuck who "didn't know" is nothing but a meaningless waste of the court's time. And you're lucky you're not going to prison with Lay & Skilling.

But in spite of the foregoing circumstances, the brokers at Enron walked away with the money they helped to steal from thousands of trusting investors who simply and legitimately didn't know they were dealing with a criminal enterprise.

Even if you're willing to believe that it never entered the mind of one who knows enough about the used auto parts business to make $250,000 in a year that some or all of those auto parts might be stolen, do you think it's fair that they be allowed to keep the fruit from a stolen tree?

Totally inapt analogy.
Anyway, someone who gets hired by a company, works according to his agreement and has no idea the company is doing anything illegal should suffer why? How about all the people who worked for AIG? Should some guy underwriting insurance policies have his salary docked because someone in the London office was dealing in insider trading?

You must be the only person left alive who DEFENDS Enron. And yes, the employees of AIG got screwed, too, as did the employees of Lehman Brothers. Which only brings home the point that YOU are wrong. GREED of that magnitude has no place in the hearts of any sane American.

Honey, you need help. Big time.

 

[MaggieMae]

The numbers originally posted are not reflective of "minimum wage."

That said, my opinion of Thomas Sowell is that he has backed himself so into a corner of being a high profile black journalist/author that I often wonder how often he cries himself to sleep at night.

Thomas Sowell is black? Who knew?

I think MM need to explain what the **** his skin color has to do with anything.

As I said, you clearly need to grow up if you don't get it.

 

[Jeremy]

Totally inapt analogy.
Anyway, someone who gets hired by a company, works according to his agreement and has no idea the company is doing anything illegal should suffer why? How about all the people who worked for AIG? Should some guy underwriting insurance policies have his salary docked because someone in the London office was dealing in insider trading?

You must be the only person left alive who DEFENDS Enron. And yes, the employees of AIG got screwed, too, as did the employees of Lehman Brothers. Which only brings home the point that YOU are wrong. GREED of that magnitude has no place in the hearts of any sane American.

Honey, you need help. Big time.

Nah... She's just blinded by her own hatred over the fact that the janitors who lost their jobs at Enron didn't end up in Federal prison.

 

[Jeremy]

Thomas Sowell is black? Who knew?

I think MM need to explain what the **** his skin color has to do with anything.

As I said, you clearly need to grow up if you don't get it.

de·flec·tion (d-flkshn)
n.
1. The act of deflecting or the condition of being deflected.
2. Deviation or a specified amount of deviation.
3. The deviation of an indicator of a measuring instrument from zero or from its normal position.
4. The movement of a structure or structural part as a result of stress.

 

[MaggieMae]

How 'bout all of you whinny little bitches that are complaining about wealth inequality just take the money you make every year in excess of what's considered the poverty line, donate it to the charity of your choice, move to the ghetto, and...

Hey Jeremy, grow up and stop being so gullible. With regard to your signature, the comment attributed to Michelle Obama was MADE UP by Laura Ingraham (who, like so many others, was once a sane person but lost her marbles when a black man became president).

As soon as you drop the "criticizing the president = racism" bullshit. Than maybe I'll consider taking advice to "grow up" from a race baiting piece of shit like you.

Race "baiting"? Boy you assholes jump at every opportunity, don't you? I don't "bait" anybody. If I want to say something, I say it.

 

[MaggieMae]

That's impossible, the whole liberal system relies on there being poverty and inequality, to remove such an important part of the system would be catastrophic as then there would be virtually no need for tax or social welfare. As for the realistic and pragmatic (non liberal approach) that is creating jobs, having low tax and providing all the basic needs and services rather than wasting all the money and resources on celebrities, Al Gore Films, and fashion.

Sigh...you can always tell the ones who lean toward the television with rapt attention whenever one of the Fox "journalists" is speaking, i.e., Glenn Beck. And then it becomes gospel truth.

The usual liberal brain fart and diversion... run back to Fox news criticisms. My question was fair and honest. And I would LOVE to hear your answer. What would "fair" wealth inequality be? Do you have percentages you would like to throw out to us?

Ah shaddap, moron. You're wasting my time. Find your own ******* percentages and start your own thread.

 

[MaggieMae]

OK. And? They worked for a company. People in the company including top management were corrupt. Do you expect everyone at Enron should have gone to jail?
The people who perpretrated the fraud were jailed and fined and today are hardly wealthy people. So talk of how the rich got that way by screwing everyone else is merely class envy and based on falsehood.

Enron screwed all of its employees and you're feeling sorry for the ones who did it because now they're in the poor house?

The only one I feel sorry for is you because your brain clearly isn't functioning. You drop in posts that are wrong, poorly argued, and make no sense and then when called on it you ignore the question.

I admitted to the mistake, but you couldn't wait to see if I did. Now you just look foolish. Do you think I just sit here advancing until I see some further response from you? Sorry, you're just not that important, and neither is my error. Move on, O Perfect One.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What would be "fair" wealth inequality in the eye of the lib? Or is the only answer the complete elimination of wealth inequality all together, (ie. true, noncorrupted communism)

Total Equality! Nothing else!

1.The Declaration of Independence memorializes the proposition that all men are created equal. At the time, the ambiguity of the phrase allowed even slave holders to find it informing.

2. But, clearly, the document was understood at the time not to promise equality of condition- even to white male Americans! Equality, as an abstract, was modified by the American idea of reward according to achievement, and a reverence for private property.

3. But the concept has been modified with the growth of modern liberalism, and the ‘egalitarian’ impulse that fuels it. Here we witness the constant expansion into areas in which equality of sorts is seen as desirable and/or mandatory. The intuitive de Tocqueville actually remarked that Americans loved equality more than freedom!

a. The principle of equality prepared men for a government that “covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, guided…Such a power stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd….The evils that extreme equality may produce are slowly disclosed; they creep gradually into the social frame; they are seen only at intervals; and at the moment at which they become most violent, habit already causes them to be no longer felt.” Alexis de Tocqueville, “Democracy in America,” volume 2.

4. Under the new definition, an exact similarity of material wealth or income should be the goal of ‘social justice.’
The above essentially from Robert Bork, "Slouching Toward Gomorrrah"

a. The desire for equality of income or of wealth is, of course, but one aspect of a more general desire for equality. “The essence of the moral idea of socialism is that human equality is the supreme value in life.” Martin Malia, “A Fatal Logic,” The National Interest, Spring 1993, pp. 80, 87

Total equality? Only a rabid Bircher/Borker would believe that and find some obscure articles to "prove" it. What is wrong is that there is no longer a LEVEL playing field.

In order for that to be true, you would have to document that there is not wholesale movement both up and down...

Let's see how long it takes to shred your premise:

Nationally:
New figures from Smart Money show that only 3% of millionaires inherited their wealth. That means 97% earned their vast fortune themselves. Smart Money also reports that 80% of millionaires are extra thrifty shoppers. Many of them even clip coupons! "

Millionaires clip coupons and other secrets of the rich! on clarkhoward.com

"In the Millionaire Next Door," Stanley and Danko tell us that "most of America's millionaires are first-generation rich." They earned their money themselves. Not through inheritances or dad's teachings. "Most people who become millionaires have confidence in their own abilities. They do not spend time worrying about whether or not their parents were wealthy."
Secrets of becoming a millionaire [Archive] - NFL Football Picks | College Football Picks

" 80% of U. S. millionaires are first generation affluent. Contrary to popular belief, most people are not born into wealth. They earn their money the old fashioned way, they work for it."

Making money: The path to becoming a millionaire - by Terry Marsh - Helium

"The vast majority of today's millionaires did not inherit their money -- they're self-made."
Richistan


Globally:
That means the formerly poor citizens of giant countries could become a lot richer and still barely show up in the data.
The result is that 2.5 billion people have seen their standards of living rise toward those of the billion people in the already developed countries — decreasing global poverty and increasing global equality. From the point of view of individuals, economic liberalization has been a huge success.
"You have to look at people," says Professor Sala-i-Martin. "Because if you look at countries, we do have lots and lots of little countries that are doing very poorly, namely Africa — 35 African countries." But all Africa has only about half as many people as China.
The rich did get richer faster than the poor did. But for the most part the poor did not get poorer. They got richer, too. In exchange for significantly rising living standards, a little more internal inequality is not such a bad thing.
The Rich Get Rich and Poor Get Poorer. Or Do They?

So, if I were a liberal, I'd be screaming that you were a liar...
but I'll simple announce that you have been shown to be abysmally incorrect.


Maggie, You’re not yourself today- I noticed the improvement immediately.

 

[MaggieMae]

You evince the kind of misunderstanding of society regularly found in the left's adherents.

1. What is the definition of poor? Is same to be compared to needs, or wants? To the world or to one's neighbor?

2. Where does personal responsibility enter into the result?

3. Why does your post seem to imply that once poor, one is relegated to the same level of existence forever. This suposition is, of course, provably false.

4. Are you familiar with the concept of capitalism? I recommend that you study the recent history of Estonia vis-a-vis Finland.

5. Left-wing social programs? From Charles Murray, Losing Ground: American Social Policy 1950-1980: “In 1964 we declared ‘War on Poverty.” In 1968 13% of Americans were poor. From 1968 to 1980 we increased social welfare payments by 400%. In 1980 13% of Americans were poor.”

6. Would I be correct in believing that you would subscribe to The American Victimization Thesis:

a. During the ‘Bush Years’ taxes on the wealthy have been slashed.
b. If your parents were rich, you’ll be rich. Otherwise, no chance.
c. Government is the answer to whatever ails us.
d. Ambition, determination, grit and sweat count for nothing.
e. Neither personal responsibility nor merit are necessary.
f. Whatever your personal failures, shortcomings, and weaknesses, your troubles are caused by anyone and everyone except youself.
g. It’s not that I don’t want to succeed, it’s that I can’t succeed.
h. The deck is always stacked against me.
i. Anyone who is poor or black or short or old or handicapped or female or gay or uncoordinated shouldn’t even try.
j. The Constitution guaranteed me ‘Life, Liberty, and Happiness!’
k. The government must make sure we are all equal in everything.
l. The government should make poor people rich and rich people poor!
m. “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Kanye West.
n. There must be more I can complain about!

Nice job of cherry picking to justify your usual extremism.

Sorry I can't return the compliment, as you have done the usual left-wing deflection as you are not able to respond in a coherent dispositive counter...


Were there not ANY of the items in my post that you felt equipped to counter??

Not one???

Simply shout 'extremist'....
That validates your leftist street creds, I guess.

As usual, PI, you post a litany of generalizations (a through n) and apply them to everyone who opposes your own extremist ideology. I'm not about to "defend" myself over any of them. And we go through this every time, don't we. You just presume that everyone to the left of you must fit neatly into your little categories, when that is so far from reality, it's ridiculous to even suggest it, especially by someone who (I presume) is as intelligent as you are.

 

[MaggieMae]

Totally inapt analogy.
Anyway, someone who gets hired by a company, works according to his agreement and has no idea the company is doing anything illegal should suffer why? How about all the people who worked for AIG? Should some guy underwriting insurance policies have his salary docked because someone in the London office was dealing in insider trading?

You must be the only person left alive who DEFENDS Enron. And yes, the employees of AIG got screwed, too, as did the employees of Lehman Brothers. Which only brings home the point that YOU are wrong. GREED of that magnitude has no place in the hearts of any sane American.

Honey, you need help. Big time.

I think not. Seems to me you've got Jeremy on your side. PI will leave the scene soon because she likes to talk about the liberal mind in general, so then you're stuck with your lil' bud as your point man.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nice job of cherry picking to justify your usual extremism.

Sorry I can't return the compliment, as you have done the usual left-wing deflection as you are not able to respond in a coherent dispositive counter...


Were there not ANY of the items in my post that you felt equipped to counter??

Not one???

Simply shout 'extremist'....
That validates your leftist street creds, I guess.

As usual, PI, you post a litany of generalizations (a through n) and apply them to everyone who opposes your own extremist ideology. I'm not about to "defend" myself over any of them. And we go through this every time, don't we. You just presume that everyone to the left of you must fit neatly into your little categories, when that is so far from reality, it's ridiculous to even suggest it, especially by someone who (I presume) is as intelligent as you are.

Oh, yeah...how about 1 through 5????

OK...throw in the towel.

But I do envy you getting 300 responses in one of your threads!

 

[MaggieMae]

Total Equality! Nothing else!

1.The Declaration of Independence memorializes the proposition that all men are created equal. At the time, the ambiguity of the phrase allowed even slave holders to find it informing.

2. But, clearly, the document was understood at the time not to promise equality of condition- even to white male Americans! Equality, as an abstract, was modified by the American idea of reward according to achievement, and a reverence for private property.

3. But the concept has been modified with the growth of modern liberalism, and the ‘egalitarian’ impulse that fuels it. Here we witness the constant expansion into areas in which equality of sorts is seen as desirable and/or mandatory. The intuitive de Tocqueville actually remarked that Americans loved equality more than freedom!

a. The principle of equality prepared men for a government that “covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, guided…Such a power stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd….The evils that extreme equality may produce are slowly disclosed; they creep gradually into the social frame; they are seen only at intervals; and at the moment at which they become most violent, habit already causes them to be no longer felt.” Alexis de Tocqueville, “Democracy in America,” volume 2.

4. Under the new definition, an exact similarity of material wealth or income should be the goal of ‘social justice.’
The above essentially from Robert Bork, "Slouching Toward Gomorrrah"

a. The desire for equality of income or of wealth is, of course, but one aspect of a more general desire for equality. “The essence of the moral idea of socialism is that human equality is the supreme value in life.” Martin Malia, “A Fatal Logic,” The National Interest, Spring 1993, pp. 80, 87

Total equality? Only a rabid Bircher/Borker would believe that and find some obscure articles to "prove" it. What is wrong is that there is no longer a LEVEL playing field.

In order for that to be true, you would have to document that there is not wholesale movement both up and down...

Let's see how long it takes to shred your premise:

Nationally:
New figures from Smart Money show that only 3% of millionaires inherited their wealth. That means 97% earned their vast fortune themselves. Smart Money also reports that 80% of millionaires are extra thrifty shoppers. Many of them even clip coupons! "

Millionaires clip coupons and other secrets of the rich! on clarkhoward.com

"In the Millionaire Next Door," Stanley and Danko tell us that "most of America's millionaires are first-generation rich." They earned their money themselves. Not through inheritances or dad's teachings. "Most people who become millionaires have confidence in their own abilities. They do not spend time worrying about whether or not their parents were wealthy."
Secrets of becoming a millionaire [Archive] - NFL Football Picks | College Football Picks

" 80% of U. S. millionaires are first generation affluent. Contrary to popular belief, most people are not born into wealth. They earn their money the old fashioned way, they work for it."

Making money: The path to becoming a millionaire - by Terry Marsh - Helium

"The vast majority of today's millionaires did not inherit their money -- they're self-made."
Richistan


Globally:
That means the formerly poor citizens of giant countries could become a lot richer and still barely show up in the data.
The result is that 2.5 billion people have seen their standards of living rise toward those of the billion people in the already developed countries — decreasing global poverty and increasing global equality. From the point of view of individuals, economic liberalization has been a huge success.
"You have to look at people," says Professor Sala-i-Martin. "Because if you look at countries, we do have lots and lots of little countries that are doing very poorly, namely Africa — 35 African countries." But all Africa has only about half as many people as China.
The rich did get richer faster than the poor did. But for the most part the poor did not get poorer. They got richer, too. In exchange for significantly rising living standards, a little more internal inequality is not such a bad thing.
The Rich Get Rich and Poor Get Poorer. Or Do They?

So, if I were a liberal, I'd be screaming that you were a liar...
but I'll simple announce that you have been shown to be abysmally incorrect.


Maggie, You’re not yourself today- I noticed the improvement immediately.

Excuse me, but you (as usual) continue to post OPINIONS that support your position. In order to get into your latest debating point (that the rich earn their money the old fashioned way), we would then need to get into educational opportunities. See what I mean? It's impossible to debate you when you consistently post a plethora of examples that demand sub-topics be included. I would love to debate education with you, so why don't you start a thread? This one has become too cumbersome and I don't have the time right now, but promise to return.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Total equality? Only a rabid Bircher/Borker would believe that and find some obscure articles to "prove" it. What is wrong is that there is no longer a LEVEL playing field.

In order for that to be true, you would have to document that there is not wholesale movement both up and down...

Let's see how long it takes to shred your premise:

Nationally:
New figures from Smart Money show that only 3% of millionaires inherited their wealth. That means 97% earned their vast fortune themselves. Smart Money also reports that 80% of millionaires are extra thrifty shoppers. Many of them even clip coupons! "

Millionaires clip coupons and other secrets of the rich! on clarkhoward.com

"In the Millionaire Next Door," Stanley and Danko tell us that "most of America's millionaires are first-generation rich." They earned their money themselves. Not through inheritances or dad's teachings. "Most people who become millionaires have confidence in their own abilities. They do not spend time worrying about whether or not their parents were wealthy."
Secrets of becoming a millionaire [Archive] - NFL Football Picks | College Football Picks

" 80% of U. S. millionaires are first generation affluent. Contrary to popular belief, most people are not born into wealth. They earn their money the old fashioned way, they work for it."

Making money: The path to becoming a millionaire - by Terry Marsh - Helium

"The vast majority of today's millionaires did not inherit their money -- they're self-made."
Richistan


Globally:
That means the formerly poor citizens of giant countries could become a lot richer and still barely show up in the data.
The result is that 2.5 billion people have seen their standards of living rise toward those of the billion people in the already developed countries — decreasing global poverty and increasing global equality. From the point of view of individuals, economic liberalization has been a huge success.
"You have to look at people," says Professor Sala-i-Martin. "Because if you look at countries, we do have lots and lots of little countries that are doing very poorly, namely Africa — 35 African countries." But all Africa has only about half as many people as China.
The rich did get richer faster than the poor did. But for the most part the poor did not get poorer. They got richer, too. In exchange for significantly rising living standards, a little more internal inequality is not such a bad thing.
The Rich Get Rich and Poor Get Poorer. Or Do They?

So, if I were a liberal, I'd be screaming that you were a liar...
but I'll simple announce that you have been shown to be abysmally incorrect.


Maggie, You’re not yourself today- I noticed the improvement immediately.

Excuse me, but you (as usual) continue to post OPINIONS that support your position. In order to get into your latest debating point (that the rich earn their money the old fashioned way), we would then need to get into educational opportunities. See what I mean? It's impossible to debate you when you consistently post a plethora of examples that demand sub-topics be included. I would love to debate education with you, so why don't you start a thread? This one has become too cumbersome and I don't have the time right now, but promise to return.

"I would love to debate education with you"

I'm down for it!

Progressive vs. traditional?

The destruction of rationality due to liberalism?

Erosion of universities?

Vouchers?

Charters?

Effects of unions?

Conservative vs. liberal perspective?

You don't think these would be ' too cumbersome'?