Zone1 What is Wrong with Inequality?

[DGS49]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

Inequality existed back in the past. The rich had a lot of money, and the poor had almost nothing. Was that good?

We're far more equal now. The problem is that the rich are using their wealth to enrich themselves and impoverish the poor. Why? Supposedly there's an electoral system where the poor can vote for their own interests. But no, the electoral system doesn't really allow that, it forces the poor to vote for two people who are usually out to enrich themselves and do the bidding for the rich.

Time to change the electoral system.

 

[task0778]

If you evenly distribute wealth to make it equal, then for too many people there is no motivation to work hard and produce more. Why bust ass? Why innovate and try new ideas? Whose gonna do the shit jobs? The dangerous jobs? **** it, why work at all?

Name me the most socialistic country in the world. Do you really believe there is no inequality of wealth there? No elites? Bullshit. Inequality has existed since the dawn of humanity. Will we all be better off that way? I don't think so.

 

[IM2]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

Inequality is bad because inequality reduces revenues and causes debt and deficits. It can kill an economy if people don't have money to spend on gadgets. Your entire post is stupid, because 1 entrepreneur would not create a problem, but government policy that has denied wealth to certain people has created a problem. It is a problem whereby America has lost more than 51 trillion dollars since 1990 alone.

But since you're a white male, the most protected class in America, it's easy for you to try excusing inequality.

 

[Muhammed]

Equality requires a brutal oppressive ultra-authoritarian government.

 

[Winco]

If you evenly distribute wealth to make it equal,

I don't recall reading where anyone has seriously suggested that the wealth should be spread out evenly.

 

[MarathonMike]

Time to change the electoral system.

I personally think it is incumbent on people who have been successful to give back. We do on a personal and community level. But you will never legislate income equality. It will never happen.

 

[Concerned American]

The problem is that the rich are using their wealth to enrich themselves

Do you not use your wealth to enrich yourself? If you say no, I call BS. That is called capitalism. Very few people are born wealthy. It is something you earn with ambition and perseverance.

 

[1srelluc]

Do you not use your wealth to enrich yourself? If you say no, I call BS. That is called capitalism. Very few people are born wealthy. It is something you earn with ambition and perseverance.

Then there are people like Chuck Schumer who never worked a real job in his life, straight out of law school and into politics since '74.

Net worth, 81 million....He "persevered" in much the same way Pelosi and other rich politicians did while decrying the wealthy who earned it.

 

[IM2]

One last thing. A person can create the greatest gadget of all time, but if he/she can't make the numbers to meet the demand for that gadget, it's a loser. So then the people producing the gadget are just as important as the person who had the idea. This alone supports the argument for equal pay for everyone.

 

[excalibur]

Equality requires a brutal oppressive ultra-authoritarian government.

And then some people are more equal than others.

 

[Concerned American]

Then there are people like Chuck Schumer who never worked a real job in his life, straight out of law school and into politics since '74.

Net worth, 81 million....He "persevered" in much the same way Pelosi and other rich politicians did while decrying the wealthy who earned it.

And there have always been the Rockefellers, Gates, Bezos, Musks and Kennedys as well as the Capones, Bonannos and Gambinos. They are really irrelevant to the point. Are you in favor of donating your wealth in the name of equality? If so, have at it. Your belief doesn't give you the right to redistribute other's wealth. Henry Ford and the Dodge boys didn't have much until they came up with a better mouse trap. They earned what they have. To your point, elected officials who have used their positions to illegally enrich themselves, should be stripped of everything they own and jailed.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I personally think it is incumbent on people who have been successful to give back. We do on a personal and community level. But you will never legislate income equality. It will never happen.

Income inequality will never happen. Equality isn't really about everyone earning the same, it's about people not being screwed over by the rich.

 

[1srelluc]

And there have always been the Rockefellers, Gates, Bezos, Musks and Kennedys as well as the Capones, Bonannos and Gambinos. They are really irrelevant to the point. Are you in favor of donating your wealth in the name of equality? If so, have at it. Your belief doesn't give you the right to redistribute other's wealth. Henry Ford and the Dodge boys didn't have much until they came up with a better mouse trap. They earned what they have. To your point, elected officials who have used their positions to illegally enrich themselves, should be stripped of everything they own and jailed.

It's unfathomable to me when I hear these rich career politicians talk about inequality....Just sayin'.

No shits given about those who earned it.....Godspeed to them.

 

[MarathonMike]

Income inequality will never happen. Equality isn't really about everyone earning the same, it's about people not being screwed over by the rich.

The best you can achieve is motivate the wealthy, especially the most wealthy to give back. You will never accomplish "fairness" by taxation that motivates the most wealthy to use their resources to fight the taxation.

 

[Concerned American]

Income inequality will never happen. Equality isn't really about everyone earning the same, it's about people not being screwed over by the rich.

Equality is about opportunity. Opportunities should be equal---what you do with your opportunity is what determines your position in life. If you choose to squander opportunities, that's on you.

 

[Hellokitty]

One last thing. A person can create the greatest gadget of all time, but if he/she can't make the numbers to meet the demand for that gadget, it's a loser. So then the people producing the gadget are just as important as the person who had the idea. This alone supports the argument for equal pay for everyone.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The best you can achieve is motivate the wealthy, especially the most wealthy to give back. You will never accomplish "fairness" by taxation that motivates the most wealthy to use their resources to fight the taxation.

Actually I think the best you can have is where the rich pay their fair share, or more.

We should be encouraging small businesses, not giving huge tax breaks to large multinationals.

The EU had a thing where it said "every company has to pay the same tax as every other company" Google or someone went to Ireland and got a tax break, the EU slapped Ireland down and said "no, they pay the same as everyone else".

In the US the rich buy success at the expense of small business owners. In the US it's hard to make it, because the rich are screwing you over. No wonder the rich wanted Brexit.

 

[Crepitus]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

YOu are a slave. That's what is wrong with inequality.

Not all inequality, but the severity of it that we are experiencing now in the US makes you a slave.

 

[Crepitus]

If you evenly distribute wealth to make it equal, then for too many people there is no motivation to work hard and produce more. Why bust ass? Why innovate and try new ideas? Whose gonna do the shit jobs? The dangerous jobs? **** it, why work at all?

Name me the most socialistic country in the world. Do you really believe there is no inequality of wealth there? No elites? Bullshit. Inequality has existed since the dawn of humanity. Will we all be better off that way? I don't think so.

If you could actually get to the level of the rich and famous simply by busting your ass working hard you would have a point.

But you can't.