What should the wealthy do? Libs How should they be sharing there wealth?

[Dragonlady]

As a conservative I believe in the free market but
over paid CEOs I am 100% against

If one comes aboard and his bonus is tied to market value increase fine
He has earned it

There have been a lot of foolish bullshit which increases the value of corporate shares in the short term, without acutally increasing the value of the company. You can cut staff and show an increase in profit in the short term, leading to a rise in share prices, but if your remaining staff get disgruntled and leave, and you lose productivity. In the long term, your company suffers.

Bonuses tied to stock market price increases simply lead CEO's to manage for the short term bonus, rather than the long-term health of the company.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Well said. I just look at it as a declining standard of living for most. And a greatly increasing standard of living for some.

Labor must be like water. Seeks its own level. Much more likely that American labor rates would decline to a level closer to the rest of the world rather than American labor rates causing third world labor rates to rise. Just to many really poor people around the world that will work for almost nothing.

Those days never existed, amigo. People working factories who made very good money usually had fair good mechanical and techical skills, too. People working in factories without high skills usually made shit wages. I worked, for example, at a DIXIE CUP plant when I was 18. I really did not make much more than minimum wages at that time. Of course Minimum wages in those days had more purchasing power thanr than now.




If but only that delusion of yours was true. Sadly it is not true for a number of reasons: 1. there are not millions of unfullfilled IT jobs. 2 not everybody is qualifed to become IT mavens; 3. Many of those who might be qualified are disqualified for reasons other than intellectual shortcomings..like age for exmple.





Yup. As a society run for the MASTERS we only want to pay TECHNOLOGISTS, not anyone in the humanities, because people trained and educated in the humanities demand that we treat people like HUMANS instead of profits centers

In 2011, there were roughly 6.9 million people across the country who were holding two or more jobs at the same time. The vast majority of those individuals were between the ages of 25 and 54, but 5.3 percent of all 20 to 24 year olds held multiple jobs - slightly higher than for the 25 to 54 year age group. There were slightly more women holding two jobs during the year than men, and roughly 5.3 percent of all employed women juggled multiple jobs while only 4.6 percent of employed men did. The overwhelming majority of multiple-job holders were white, and roughly 5.1 percent of all white workers held multiple jobs compared to 4.5 percent of workers of Black or African American descent, 3.1 percent of workers of Asian descent, and 3.0 percent of workers of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity.

The majority of all multiple-job holders were married in 2011, but 5.3 percent of workers who were widowed, divorced, or separated worked two or more jobs compared with 4.7 percent of married workers and 5.1 percent of workers who had never been married. This was especially true for women: 6.1 percent of female workers who were widowed, divorced, or separated and 6.0 percent of female workers who were never married juggled multiple jobs at the same time compared with just 4.7 percent of female workers who were married.

Slightly more than one-half of all people who held two or more jobs at the same time during 2011 reported having a primary job full-time and a secondary job part-time. Very few individuals reported having two full-time jobs concurrently. However, women with multiple jobs were much more likely to be working two part-time jobs and the number of women who did work two or more part-time jobs was roughly double the number of men who did the same.

[quot] We will do it and leave behind the folks stuck in the 50s union mentality.
Good riddance.

I know I'll probably not convince you this is true, but workers today work MORE hours than they did in the 50s.

So your delusions that Americans are lazy is your conceit, not reality.

According to the BLS

In the second quarter of 2012 the average hours worked were 35.5 hours a week

Table B-2. Average weekly hours and overtime of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

In 1950 the average of all workers was 42.7

Hours of Work in U.S. History | Economic History Services

That's virtually a days work difference.

 

[The Rabbi]

Here is the plan...

Since the 1980s we have been implementing supply side theories on the understanding that the money we filtered to the highest levels would trickle down in the form of a booming economy and more jobs

Since it didn't work......give us our money back

Was that a contest to see how much ignorance, stupidity and error you could fit into one post?

If it is too late to get our money back, maybe we can just end those supply side policies

Those were ended in 1990 under Pres George HW BUsh. Where have you been?

 

[The Rabbi]

Those days never existed, amigo. People working factories who made very good money usually had fair good mechanical and techical skills, too. People working in factories without high skills usually made shit wages. I worked, for example, at a DIXIE CUP plant when I was 18. I really did not make much more than minimum wages at that time. Of course Minimum wages in those days had more purchasing power thanr than now.




If but only that delusion of yours was true. Sadly it is not true for a number of reasons: 1. there are not millions of unfullfilled IT jobs. 2 not everybody is qualifed to become IT mavens; 3. Many of those who might be qualified are disqualified for reasons other than intellectual shortcomings..like age for exmple.





Yup. As a society run for the MASTERS we only want to pay TECHNOLOGISTS, not anyone in the humanities, because people trained and educated in the humanities demand that we treat people like HUMANS instead of profits centers








[quot] We will do it and leave behind the folks stuck in the 50s union mentality.
Good riddance.

I know I'll probably not convince you this is true, but workers today work MORE hours than they did in the 50s.

So your delusions that Americans are lazy is your conceit, not reality.

According to the BLS

In the second quarter of 2012 the average hours worked were 35.5 hours a week

Table B-2. Average weekly hours and overtime of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted

In 1950 the average of all workers was 42.7

Hours of Work in U.S. History | Economic History Services

That's virtually a days work difference.

Facts are mere inconveniences to libs.

 

[The T]

Was that a contest to see how much ignorance, stupidity and error you could fit into one post?

If it is too late to get our money back, maybe we can just end those supply side policies

Those were ended in 1990 under Pres George HW BUsh. Where have you been?

Both Bushes torpedoed Reagan policies for 'Kinder gentler' and 'Compassionate Conservatism'. BOTH set the Conservative movement back decades and allowed Statism to flourish.

 

[Nosmo King]

So apparently the right wing posters here, in their wisdom and beneficence, have concluded that there are no impending macro-economic problems with concentrating wealth among the very few. Cutting the standard of living for the majority of Americans is an economic imperative to assure the wealthy maintain there considerable wealth. The right wing posters here seem to think that not only should wealth be concentrated at the top, but American wage earners are stupid, lazy, entitlement minded sloths who deserve to be punished for their lack of education, initiative, foresightedness and be relegated to the lowest rungs of the economic ladder.

Had the average worker gone into hedge fund management, like so many of the right wing self righteous posters here clearly have, wealth would be something to be taken for granted. Are all those who believe that income disparity should increase independently wealthy players in the stock market or denizens of the executive suite? Is there enough room up there to allow the average family in too?

I can't understand why the right holds work in contempt while holding wealth as a cardinal virtue. Workers deserve nothing because workers aren't humans, workers are simply a commodity to produce wealth for the very few. Why is this 'ethic' so prized among a political group who daily testifies about their love of America? What is America but her people? I guess if you're a Conservative, only some of the people count. Others are drudges ill prepared to enter the realm of the wealthy.

 

[The Rabbi]

So apparently the right wing posters here, in their wisdom and beneficence, have concluded that there are no impending macro-economic problems with concentrating wealth among the very few. Cutting the standard of living for the majority of Americans is an economic imperative to assure the wealthy maintain there considerable wealth. The right wing posters here seem to think that not only should wealth be concentrated at the top, but American wage earners are stupid, lazy, entitlement minded sloths who deserve to be punished for their lack of education, initiative, foresightedness and be relegated to the lowest rungs of the economic ladder.

Had the average worker gone into hedge fund management, like so many of the right wing self righteous posters here clearly have, wealth would be something to be taken for granted. Are all those who believe that income disparity should increase independently wealthy players in the stock market or denizens of the executive suite? Is there enough room up there to allow the average family in too?

I can't understand why the right holds work in contempt while holding wealth as a cardinal virtue. Workers deserve nothing because workers aren't humans, workers are simply a commodity to produce wealth for the very few. Why is this 'ethic' so prized among a political group who daily testifies about their love of America? What is America but her people? I guess if you're a Conservative, only some of the people count. Others are drudges ill prepared to enter the realm of the wealthy.

For starters, why don't you outline exactly the problem with disparate wealth/income concentration. As many times as leftists have been challenged to show why this is a problem they have failed to explain exactly what the problem is.

Second, everyone enjoys a higher standard of living now than they did 20 years ago. Heck, even toilets are better, as I am sure you noticed.

Third, yes workers deserve nothing. They earn what they get. Like everyone else. No one deserves anything, except basic Constitutional rights as citizens of this country.

 

[Nosmo King]

So apparently the right wing posters here, in their wisdom and beneficence, have concluded that there are no impending macro-economic problems with concentrating wealth among the very few. Cutting the standard of living for the majority of Americans is an economic imperative to assure the wealthy maintain there considerable wealth. The right wing posters here seem to think that not only should wealth be concentrated at the top, but American wage earners are stupid, lazy, entitlement minded sloths who deserve to be punished for their lack of education, initiative, foresightedness and be relegated to the lowest rungs of the economic ladder.

Had the average worker gone into hedge fund management, like so many of the right wing self righteous posters here clearly have, wealth would be something to be taken for granted. Are all those who believe that income disparity should increase independently wealthy players in the stock market or denizens of the executive suite? Is there enough room up there to allow the average family in too?

I can't understand why the right holds work in contempt while holding wealth as a cardinal virtue. Workers deserve nothing because workers aren't humans, workers are simply a commodity to produce wealth for the very few. Why is this 'ethic' so prized among a political group who daily testifies about their love of America? What is America but her people? I guess if you're a Conservative, only some of the people count. Others are drudges ill prepared to enter the realm of the wealthy.

For starters, why don't you outline exactly the problem with disparate wealth/income concentration. As many times as leftists have been challenged to show why this is a problem they have failed to explain exactly what the problem is.

Second, everyone enjoys a higher standard of living now than they did 20 years ago. Heck, even toilets are better, as I am sure you noticed.

Third, yes workers deserve nothing. They earn what they get. Like everyone else. No one deserves anything, except basic Constitutional rights as citizens of this country.

Well, just for you and your astronomically poor comprehensive skills, here's the problem with wealth disparity.

CONSUMER SPENDING DRIVES THIS ECONOMY Not Capital Gains, not hedge funds, not the ability to play stock and commodities markets like casinos. CONSUMER SPENDING puts capital in motion throughout the economy. Goods bought today must be produced (creates jobs), shipped (creates job), stocked (creates jobs) marketed (creates jobs) and sold (creates jobs). When jobs are created, there are more consumers to buy, ship, stock, market and sell good to. Take away the buying power of the consumer and the whole system slows down dramatically.

Just take the housing market as an example. If Americans had the buying power to enter the market with confidence, houses would be built, housing materials would be manufactured, household goods would be sold and real estate taxes paid. All these activities not only produce wealth, but raise the standard of living, make for a much more secure national economy and provide the taxes to maintain crucial infrastructure which provides the means of distribution of goods and services

But if capital is sequestered among the very few, their buying power is not great enough to sustain the Capitalist system. Why? Because 1% of the population is a SMALLER NUMBER THAN 99% OF THE POPULATION and that 1% doesn't spend capital on the consumer goods which fuel the system.

Americans today MUST HAVE TWO OR MORE JOBS TO ATTEMPT PARITY WITH THE STANDARD OF LIVING ON 20 YEARS AGO. While convenience and a plethora of electronic devices makes life easier, it does not mean that the standard of living, the capital at the disposal of the average American has gone up.

You wise, beneficent Conservatives claim to uphold Family Values. How on earth can you say that while you devalue the family by committing to policies that do nothing for the family but erode economic security while molly coddling the wealthy? Workers deserve NOTHING? While the trickle down economic policies tilt the table in favor of the wealthy? Why are they deserving while the vast majority of American workers DESERVE NOTHING?

What benefit will occur through concentrating wealth among the few? Will they develop some sense of largess and permit that wealth to actually "Trickle Down" to the level of the majority? If that's what is supposed to happen, when do you think it will start?

 

[Dragonlady]

For starters, why don't you outline exactly the problem with disparate wealth/income concentration. As many times as leftists have been challenged to show why this is a problem they have failed to explain exactly what the problem is.

Liberals have explained to you over and over why it is necessary for workers to have living wages, and what the economic consequences of flat wages and shipping manufacturing jobs overseas over the past 30 years have lead to.

You must not be reading these posts or even reading a newspaper if you can't figure it out at this point, or you are just being wilfully ignorant.

 

[The Rabbi]

So apparently the right wing posters here, in their wisdom and beneficence, have concluded that there are no impending macro-economic problems with concentrating wealth among the very few. Cutting the standard of living for the majority of Americans is an economic imperative to assure the wealthy maintain there considerable wealth. The right wing posters here seem to think that not only should wealth be concentrated at the top, but American wage earners are stupid, lazy, entitlement minded sloths who deserve to be punished for their lack of education, initiative, foresightedness and be relegated to the lowest rungs of the economic ladder.

Had the average worker gone into hedge fund management, like so many of the right wing self righteous posters here clearly have, wealth would be something to be taken for granted. Are all those who believe that income disparity should increase independently wealthy players in the stock market or denizens of the executive suite? Is there enough room up there to allow the average family in too?

I can't understand why the right holds work in contempt while holding wealth as a cardinal virtue. Workers deserve nothing because workers aren't humans, workers are simply a commodity to produce wealth for the very few. Why is this 'ethic' so prized among a political group who daily testifies about their love of America? What is America but her people? I guess if you're a Conservative, only some of the people count. Others are drudges ill prepared to enter the realm of the wealthy.

For starters, why don't you outline exactly the problem with disparate wealth/income concentration. As many times as leftists have been challenged to show why this is a problem they have failed to explain exactly what the problem is.

Second, everyone enjoys a higher standard of living now than they did 20 years ago. Heck, even toilets are better, as I am sure you noticed.

Third, yes workers deserve nothing. They earn what they get. Like everyone else. No one deserves anything, except basic Constitutional rights as citizens of this country.

Well, just for you and your astronomically poor comprehensive skills, here's the problem with wealth disparity.

CONSUMER SPENDING DRIVES THIS ECONOMY Not Capital Gains, not hedge funds, not the ability to play stock and commodities markets like casinos. CONSUMER SPENDING puts capital in motion throughout the economy. Goods bought today must be produced (creates jobs), shipped (creates job), stocked (creates jobs) marketed (creates jobs) and sold (creates jobs). When jobs are created, there are more consumers to buy, ship, stock, market and sell good to. Take away the buying power of the consumer and the whole system slows down dramatically.

Just take the housing market as an example. If Americans had the buying power to enter the market with confidence, houses would be built, housing materials would be manufactured, household goods would be sold and real estate taxes paid. All these activities not only produce wealth, but raise the standard of living, make for a much more secure national economy and provide the taxes to maintain crucial infrastructure which provides the means of distribution of goods and services

But if capital is sequestered among the very few, their buying power is not great enough to sustain the Capitalist system. Why? Because 1% of the population is a SMALLER NUMBER THAN 99% OF THE POPULATION and that 1% doesn't spend capital on the consumer goods which fuel the system.

Americans today MUST HAVE TWO OR MORE JOBS TO ATTEMPT PARITY WITH THE STANDARD OF LIVING ON 20 YEARS AGO. While convenience and a plethora of electronic devices makes life easier, it does not mean that the standard of living, the capital at the disposal of the average American has gone up.

You wise, beneficent Conservatives claim to uphold Family Values. How on earth can you say that while you devalue the family by committing to policies that do nothing for the family but erode economic security while molly coddling the wealthy? Workers deserve NOTHING? While the trickle down economic policies tilt the table in favor of the wealthy? Why are they deserving while the vast majority of American workers DESERVE NOTHING?

What benefit will occur through concentrating wealth among the few? Will they develop some sense of largess and permit that wealth to actually "Trickle Down" to the level of the majority? If that's what is supposed to happen, when do you think it will start?

OK, you start with a fallacy and proceed from there.
Consumer spending does not drive the economy. Business investment drives the economy. You make it sound like there are maybe 30 people in America who control all the wealth and everyone else is begging for pennies. that clearly isn't the case. There is plenty of consumer spending going on even now.
People 20 years ago had two jobs as well. Our standard of living is much higher than it was 20 years ago.

No one is proposing to concentrate wealth. But I turn it around and ask What benefit is it to punish hard working successful people and reward lazy inefficient people?

But the Left isn't unhappy with poor people getting poorer. They are only unhappy with rich people getting richer. Do I need to have lady Thatcher explain this to you again?

 

[The Rabbi]

For starters, why don't you outline exactly the problem with disparate wealth/income concentration. As many times as leftists have been challenged to show why this is a problem they have failed to explain exactly what the problem is.

Liberals have explained to you over and over why it is necessary for workers to have living wages, and what the economic consequences of flat wages and shipping manufacturing jobs overseas over the past 30 years have lead to.

You must not be reading these posts or even reading a newspaper if you can't figure it out at this point, or you are just being wilfully ignorant.

Yeah, they have failed at both those tasks. We have of course mroe manufacturing in this country than ever before, accounting for the Obama recession. And up until 5 years ago we had years of painfully low unemployment, despite "shipping manufacturing jobs overseas". So both those points are simply wrong. And they are irrelevant to the argument about "wealth concentration."

I'd suggest a course in Economics before you spout off ignorant nonsense again.

 

[Nosmo King]

For starters, why don't you outline exactly the problem with disparate wealth/income concentration. As many times as leftists have been challenged to show why this is a problem they have failed to explain exactly what the problem is.

Second, everyone enjoys a higher standard of living now than they did 20 years ago. Heck, even toilets are better, as I am sure you noticed.

Third, yes workers deserve nothing. They earn what they get. Like everyone else. No one deserves anything, except basic Constitutional rights as citizens of this country.

Well, just for you and your astronomically poor comprehensive skills, here's the problem with wealth disparity.

CONSUMER SPENDING DRIVES THIS ECONOMY Not Capital Gains, not hedge funds, not the ability to play stock and commodities markets like casinos. CONSUMER SPENDING puts capital in motion throughout the economy. Goods bought today must be produced (creates jobs), shipped (creates job), stocked (creates jobs) marketed (creates jobs) and sold (creates jobs). When jobs are created, there are more consumers to buy, ship, stock, market and sell good to. Take away the buying power of the consumer and the whole system slows down dramatically.

Just take the housing market as an example. If Americans had the buying power to enter the market with confidence, houses would be built, housing materials would be manufactured, household goods would be sold and real estate taxes paid. All these activities not only produce wealth, but raise the standard of living, make for a much more secure national economy and provide the taxes to maintain crucial infrastructure which provides the means of distribution of goods and services

But if capital is sequestered among the very few, their buying power is not great enough to sustain the Capitalist system. Why? Because 1% of the population is a SMALLER NUMBER THAN 99% OF THE POPULATION and that 1% doesn't spend capital on the consumer goods which fuel the system.

Americans today MUST HAVE TWO OR MORE JOBS TO ATTEMPT PARITY WITH THE STANDARD OF LIVING ON 20 YEARS AGO. While convenience and a plethora of electronic devices makes life easier, it does not mean that the standard of living, the capital at the disposal of the average American has gone up.

You wise, beneficent Conservatives claim to uphold Family Values. How on earth can you say that while you devalue the family by committing to policies that do nothing for the family but erode economic security while molly coddling the wealthy? Workers deserve NOTHING? While the trickle down economic policies tilt the table in favor of the wealthy? Why are they deserving while the vast majority of American workers DESERVE NOTHING?

What benefit will occur through concentrating wealth among the few? Will they develop some sense of largess and permit that wealth to actually "Trickle Down" to the level of the majority? If that's what is supposed to happen, when do you think it will start?

OK, you start with a fallacy and proceed from there.
Consumer spending does not drive the economy. Business investment drives the economy. You make it sound like there are maybe 30 people in America who control all the wealth and everyone else is begging for pennies. that clearly isn't the case. There is plenty of consumer spending going on even now.
People 20 years ago had two jobs as well. Our standard of living is much higher than it was 20 years ago.

No one is proposing to concentrate wealth. But I turn it around and ask What benefit is it to punish hard working successful people and reward lazy inefficient people?

But the Left isn't unhappy with poor people getting poorer. They are only unhappy with rich people getting richer. Do I need to have lady Thatcher explain this to you again?

Let's pretend that your world is the right world where up is down, work is evil and wealth and greed are virtuous. If indeed business investment is the factor that makes economic growth and consumer spending is just a side benefit without contributing to growth, why aren't we experiencing a water shed of growth today? The markets are all in record territory. The percentage of wealth held by the smallest percentage of Americans is greater than ever. There is more than ample capital to provided for business investment.

WHERE THE HELL IS IT?

Forty years of Trickle Down policies have netted NOTHING to the wealth of average Americans. Forty years of Reagan and Thatcher and the board rooms of Wall Street investment bankers calling the shots has netted NOTHING toward furthering economic growth.

Instead we have working Americans, the people you say are lazy and inefficient losing ground due to lower wages, confiscated benefits (which the executive suite never concedes) and a lowering of the buying power of the one force that makes the economy grow: the American consumer, dwindle to third world status.

Your chicken of business investment desperately needs the egg of consumer spending to even exist! Who is going to invest in a community where there are no consumers to buy the product? Investors will build factories and distribution networks if and only if there are people waiting with cash in hand to buy what they are selling. But so long as the people are regarded as lazy, inefficient, entitlement minded slugs by the wise and beneficent Conservatives doing the bidding of the wealthy, there won't be that sustaining force of spending needed for the wealthy.

Dismiss work as laziness while rewarding greed as virtuous is an ethic that leads to self destruction. And so far as the modern, intellectually incurious American Conservative goes, that destruction cannot happen soon enough to save the American way of life.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well, just for you and your astronomically poor comprehensive skills, here's the problem with wealth disparity.

CONSUMER SPENDING DRIVES THIS ECONOMY Not Capital Gains, not hedge funds, not the ability to play stock and commodities markets like casinos. CONSUMER SPENDING puts capital in motion throughout the economy. Goods bought today must be produced (creates jobs), shipped (creates job), stocked (creates jobs) marketed (creates jobs) and sold (creates jobs). When jobs are created, there are more consumers to buy, ship, stock, market and sell good to. Take away the buying power of the consumer and the whole system slows down dramatically.

Just take the housing market as an example. If Americans had the buying power to enter the market with confidence, houses would be built, housing materials would be manufactured, household goods would be sold and real estate taxes paid. All these activities not only produce wealth, but raise the standard of living, make for a much more secure national economy and provide the taxes to maintain crucial infrastructure which provides the means of distribution of goods and services

But if capital is sequestered among the very few, their buying power is not great enough to sustain the Capitalist system. Why? Because 1% of the population is a SMALLER NUMBER THAN 99% OF THE POPULATION and that 1% doesn't spend capital on the consumer goods which fuel the system.

Americans today MUST HAVE TWO OR MORE JOBS TO ATTEMPT PARITY WITH THE STANDARD OF LIVING ON 20 YEARS AGO. While convenience and a plethora of electronic devices makes life easier, it does not mean that the standard of living, the capital at the disposal of the average American has gone up.

You wise, beneficent Conservatives claim to uphold Family Values. How on earth can you say that while you devalue the family by committing to policies that do nothing for the family but erode economic security while molly coddling the wealthy? Workers deserve NOTHING? While the trickle down economic policies tilt the table in favor of the wealthy? Why are they deserving while the vast majority of American workers DESERVE NOTHING?

What benefit will occur through concentrating wealth among the few? Will they develop some sense of largess and permit that wealth to actually "Trickle Down" to the level of the majority? If that's what is supposed to happen, when do you think it will start?

OK, you start with a fallacy and proceed from there.
Consumer spending does not drive the economy. Business investment drives the economy. You make it sound like there are maybe 30 people in America who control all the wealth and everyone else is begging for pennies. that clearly isn't the case. There is plenty of consumer spending going on even now.
People 20 years ago had two jobs as well. Our standard of living is much higher than it was 20 years ago.

No one is proposing to concentrate wealth. But I turn it around and ask What benefit is it to punish hard working successful people and reward lazy inefficient people?

But the Left isn't unhappy with poor people getting poorer. They are only unhappy with rich people getting richer. Do I need to have lady Thatcher explain this to you again?

Let's pretend that your world is the right world where up is down, work is evil and wealth and greed are virtuous. If indeed business investment is the factor that makes economic growth and consumer spending is just a side benefit without contributing to growth, why aren't we experiencing a water shed of growth today? The markets are all in record territory. The percentage of wealth held by the smallest percentage of Americans is greater than ever. There is more than ample capital to provided for business investment.

WHERE THE HELL IS IT?

Forty years of Trickle Down policies have netted NOTHING to the wealth of average Americans. Forty years of Reagan and Thatcher and the board rooms of Wall Street investment bankers calling the shots has netted NOTHING toward furthering economic growth.

Instead we have working Americans, the people you say are lazy and inefficient losing ground due to lower wages, confiscated benefits (which the executive suite never concedes) and a lowering of the buying power of the one force that makes the economy grow: the American consumer, dwindle to third world status.

Your chicken of business investment desperately needs the egg of consumer spending to even exist! Who is going to invest in a community where there are no consumers to buy the product? Investors will build factories and distribution networks if and only if there are people waiting with cash in hand to buy what they are selling. But so long as the people are regarded as lazy, inefficient, entitlement minded slugs by the wise and beneficent Conservatives doing the bidding of the wealthy, there won't be that sustaining force of spending needed for the wealthy.

Dismiss work as laziness while rewarding greed as virtuous is an ethic that leads to self destruction. And so far as the modern, intellectually incurious American Conservative goes, that destruction cannot happen soon enough to save the American way of life.

So instead of addressing my points you deflect?
OK, businesses are not investing in new jobs because Obamacare has raised the cost of doing that enormously, with no way to quantify how much more down the pike. Add to that uncertainties in regulation and taxation and business will sit this one out.

 

[Nosmo King]

OK, you start with a fallacy and proceed from there.
Consumer spending does not drive the economy. Business investment drives the economy. You make it sound like there are maybe 30 people in America who control all the wealth and everyone else is begging for pennies. that clearly isn't the case. There is plenty of consumer spending going on even now.
People 20 years ago had two jobs as well. Our standard of living is much higher than it was 20 years ago.

No one is proposing to concentrate wealth. But I turn it around and ask What benefit is it to punish hard working successful people and reward lazy inefficient people?

But the Left isn't unhappy with poor people getting poorer. They are only unhappy with rich people getting richer. Do I need to have lady Thatcher explain this to you again?

Let's pretend that your world is the right world where up is down, work is evil and wealth and greed are virtuous. If indeed business investment is the factor that makes economic growth and consumer spending is just a side benefit without contributing to growth, why aren't we experiencing a water shed of growth today? The markets are all in record territory. The percentage of wealth held by the smallest percentage of Americans is greater than ever. There is more than ample capital to provided for business investment.

WHERE THE HELL IS IT?

Forty years of Trickle Down policies have netted NOTHING to the wealth of average Americans. Forty years of Reagan and Thatcher and the board rooms of Wall Street investment bankers calling the shots has netted NOTHING toward furthering economic growth.

Instead we have working Americans, the people you say are lazy and inefficient losing ground due to lower wages, confiscated benefits (which the executive suite never concedes) and a lowering of the buying power of the one force that makes the economy grow: the American consumer, dwindle to third world status.

Your chicken of business investment desperately needs the egg of consumer spending to even exist! Who is going to invest in a community where there are no consumers to buy the product? Investors will build factories and distribution networks if and only if there are people waiting with cash in hand to buy what they are selling. But so long as the people are regarded as lazy, inefficient, entitlement minded slugs by the wise and beneficent Conservatives doing the bidding of the wealthy, there won't be that sustaining force of spending needed for the wealthy.

Dismiss work as laziness while rewarding greed as virtuous is an ethic that leads to self destruction. And so far as the modern, intellectually incurious American Conservative goes, that destruction cannot happen soon enough to save the American way of life.

So instead of addressing my points you deflect?
OK, businesses are not investing in new jobs because Obamacare has raised the cost of doing that enormously, with no way to quantify how much more down the pike. Add to that uncertainties in regulation and taxation and business will sit this one out.

I did not deflect! I pointed out to you in clear, simple easy to understand terms that your concept of business investment as the driving force in our economy is as wrong as everything else you believe.

I guess by clearly pointing that out, your already dimmed eye got in the way making you even blinder. Well, if you can't address a retort, you might as well cower behind the idiot's skirts of calling truth "deflection".

Face it. You cannot dig yourself out of a hole made of wrong ideas. Defending the notion that workers are lazy, inefficient, stupid, entitlement minded slugs can be exhausting on top of intellectually embarrassing. You need a rest.

 

[The Rabbi]

Let's pretend that your world is the right world where up is down, work is evil and wealth and greed are virtuous. If indeed business investment is the factor that makes economic growth and consumer spending is just a side benefit without contributing to growth, why aren't we experiencing a water shed of growth today? The markets are all in record territory. The percentage of wealth held by the smallest percentage of Americans is greater than ever. There is more than ample capital to provided for business investment.

WHERE THE HELL IS IT?

Forty years of Trickle Down policies have netted NOTHING to the wealth of average Americans. Forty years of Reagan and Thatcher and the board rooms of Wall Street investment bankers calling the shots has netted NOTHING toward furthering economic growth.

Instead we have working Americans, the people you say are lazy and inefficient losing ground due to lower wages, confiscated benefits (which the executive suite never concedes) and a lowering of the buying power of the one force that makes the economy grow: the American consumer, dwindle to third world status.

Your chicken of business investment desperately needs the egg of consumer spending to even exist! Who is going to invest in a community where there are no consumers to buy the product? Investors will build factories and distribution networks if and only if there are people waiting with cash in hand to buy what they are selling. But so long as the people are regarded as lazy, inefficient, entitlement minded slugs by the wise and beneficent Conservatives doing the bidding of the wealthy, there won't be that sustaining force of spending needed for the wealthy.

Dismiss work as laziness while rewarding greed as virtuous is an ethic that leads to self destruction. And so far as the modern, intellectually incurious American Conservative goes, that destruction cannot happen soon enough to save the American way of life.

So instead of addressing my points you deflect?
OK, businesses are not investing in new jobs because Obamacare has raised the cost of doing that enormously, with no way to quantify how much more down the pike. Add to that uncertainties in regulation and taxation and business will sit this one out.

I did not deflect! I pointed out to you in clear, simple easy to understand terms that your concept of business investment as the driving force in our economy is as wrong as everything else you believe.

I guess by clearly pointing that out, your already dimmed eye got in the way making you even blinder. Well, if you can't address a retort, you might as well cower behind the idiot's skirts of calling truth "deflection".

Face it. You cannot dig yourself out of a hole made of wrong ideas. Defending the notion that workers are lazy, inefficient, stupid, entitlement minded slugs can be exhausting on top of intellectually embarrassing. You need a rest.

I posit that business investment drives the economy and you respond by pointing out that business investment has been low, accounting for our poor economic performance.
I'd say you need a course in logic. And economics.

 

[Gadawg73]

If the poor would spend more time taking care of their own family instead of bitching here about the wealthy maybe they would not be poor in a few years.
Most wealthy are wealthy because they keep doing the SAME THINGS that made them wealthy to begin with. Education, hard work, savings, discipline, DO NOT HAVE KIDS YOU CAN NOT AFFORD and do not commit crimes.
Most poor are poor because they keep doing the SAME THINGS that made them poor like quit school, have kids out of wedlock they can not feed, live as single parent households, do not work and try to educate themselves.

 

[Zona]

I read a joke where the Koch brothers have 12 cookies
take 11
give 1/2 of one to a Conservative
and then tell the same "look at that person on wellfare, he is trying to take half of your cookie"

What would you have them do?
Do you understand why I cannot ever become "rich"

Perhaps thy take lessons on the proper use of the word "there". ???

 

[Dragonlady]

No one is proposing to concentrate wealth. But I turn it around and ask What benefit is it to punish hard working successful people and reward lazy inefficient people?

But the Left isn't unhappy with poor people getting poorer. They are only unhappy with rich people getting richer. Do I need to have lady Thatcher explain this to you again?

The left is equally unhappy with the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer. Neither is good for the general economy.

As long as you believe that investment drives employment, you will be living in a conservative lala land. Rich people don't really work that hard compared to the poor, many of who work two jobs just to get by.

When consumer spending goes up, so does employment.

As for trickle down economics, we've been waiting for over 30 years. That trickle should be a flood by now, but so far, we haven't felt so much as a drop. All there's been since Reagan was elected is the giant sucking sound of the wealth of the nation moving upward.

 

[regent]

Democracy requires a fairly large middle class and ours has dwindled. The wealthy use some of their wealth to contribute to politicians and in exchange the politicians pass laws giving tax breaks, loopholes and other incentives to the wealthy contributors. One hand washes the other.

 

[Gadawg73]

Democracy requires a fairly large middle class and ours has dwindled. The wealthy use some of their wealth to contribute to politicians and in exchange the politicians pass laws giving tax breaks, loopholes and other incentives to the wealthy contributors. One hand washes the other.

We do not live in a mob majority rule democracy.