What's the "Conservative" Answer?

[boedicca]

There aren't going to be 7 billion middle class Chinese (the world population in total in that amount) without there first existing pools of capital to invest in the plant, equipment, and technology which makes productive enough jobs to warrant middle class wages.

 

[kaz]

You can't slant every bit of the economy towards the rich and screw everyone else

So my choices are to go along with the liberal the rich are greedy and I want their money so screw them campaign or I'm with the rich and against everyone else? Why are those my only choices?

Actually, I am for personal liberty. I am against either screwing or protecting the rich. I want the liberty to make my own choices and live with the consequences. With your liberal hate campaign against people based on their bank accounts, we are all at risk. Who said this, no man is free unless all men are free? You will be far better off if you support politicians who make you free to make your own choices and live with those choices then you will be no matter how successful hate campaign against the rich is. Your confiscation and redistribution of wealth campaign will never make you free because you will not be living on your own effort. Just your own greed.

Unless you feel "rich people" make jobs to give the middle class "something to do" out of the goodness of their hearts. Rich people are the "source of all that is good" and, because they are so good, they create jobs for no other reason than to trickle down a few crumbs for those desperate and undeserving "middle class". I guess in that reality, jobs do come from the "rich".

They come from the rich because the rich do those things that made them rich, which also creates jobs. And I applaud you for working the word "reality" into that mind fuck. Well done...

 

[asterism]

do the rich ever put money into their own pockets and just blow it?

Yes, what is the relevance of the question?


It's not auto-function, it's how they got rich in the first place. It's not coincidence, there is a direct cause and effect relationship.

But the average joes will be irresponsible with their money always.

where does this come from?

It came out of your ass, I didn't say that. You did. Jobs come from the rich, not the middle class. That is basic economics. If you can prove the field of economics is wrong, then go for it.

Jobs come from "supply and demand". If people don't have money to buy anything, no jobs will be created because there will be no demand. THAT is "basic economics".

You can't slant every bit of the economy towards the rich and screw everyone else.

Unless you feel "rich people" make jobs to give the middle class "something to do" out of the goodness of their hearts. Rich people are the "source of all that is good" and, because they are so good, they create jobs for no other reason than to trickle down a few crumbs for those desperate and undeserving "middle class". I guess in that reality, jobs do come from the "rich".

Everyone's gotta eat. There's the demand. Food grows naturally. There's the supply.

 

[asterism]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

B would be better, but that's because A is much smaller than B. A is $42 Trillion, B is ten times larger. The real question is how can so much wealth get under someone's control to be able to make that choice?

 

[Jarhead]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

Exactly where did the 7 billion get the 60K...and how would they get it again after they spent it?

The thought I just had when I read your post?

Now I see why Obama, Reid, Schumer, Pelosi, et al fool you guys so easily.

It is pathetic.

 

[beowolfe]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

(A) is the correct answer because they would build companies and hire the 7 billion who need jobs and create an engine. If you chose (B) they would spend it and that would be that.

I guess you didn't figure out that the 7 billion middle class Chinese would already have jobs which would be the reason why they are middle class.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

Well....(B) is what America was from 1980 - 2007...except it wasn't $60,000 to spend it was $60,000 to borrow.

 

[Sheldon]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

Those numbers are off. I think if it's 700m middle class, the dollar amount would be equal. So,

if you're selling crude oil and condoms, B

if you're selling a large stake in your international real-estate and banking conglomerate, probably A

 

[Skull Pilot]

The fatal flaw here is the assumption that 60,000 people with $7 billion and 7 billion people with $60K cannot exist in the same marketplace.

 

[Sallow]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

(A) is the correct answer because they would build companies and hire the 7 billion who need jobs and create an engine. If you chose (B) they would spend it and that would be that.

Why?

Generally companies are created by several people getting together..pooling their resources and sharing the work.

The people with lots of money have no need to make companies to employ anyone.

It's not that freakin hard to figure out.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The correct answer is: both

Don't fall for the false dichotomy.

 

[Sallow]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

Exactly where did the 7 billion get the 60K...and how would they get it again after they spent it?

The thought I just had when I read your post?

Now I see why Obama, Reid, Schumer, Pelosi, et al fool you guys so easily.

It is pathetic.

What pathetic is that people think that the wealthy want to do anything to benefit society.

Now I see why Cheney, Palin, Bachman, The Koch Brothers and Barbour fool you guys so easily.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

Exactly where did the 7 billion get the 60K...and how would they get it again after they spent it?

The thought I just had when I read your post?

Now I see why Obama, Reid, Schumer, Pelosi, et al fool you guys so easily.

It is pathetic.

It's not pathetic, it's an illistration to make a point. Don't over think it - just pretend you're a brand new marketing manager for a manufacturing plant and the CEO just asked which market you want to hitch your career wagon to.

 

[Late2TheParty]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

There is 10x the money in scenario B than scenario A.

I imagine inflation would be rampant too. Like 1920s throw-that-worthless-cash-in-the-fireplace level... as there just isn't the capacity to meet the demands of that money, so money would fight for goods rather than goods fighting for cash.

There aren't 7 billion chinese people either, closer to 1.3 billion or so. Right now there's only about 1000 billionaires in the world -- and the number will be a lot less if they have to have 7 billion.

 

[Foxfyre]

The answer is: tax cuts.

That's not even part of the question. The question boils down to which is better: A small aristocracy with all the money or a huge middle class with all the money?

It's a simple question. If you own stock in or are working at a manufacturing plant that depends on selling X number of units per month to keep the lights and machines on, which would you rather have as a market, 6000 Aristocrats with a few billion in the bank each or 7 billion people with middle class incomes?

Should that answer be different for Europe? For India? For America?

But the question isn't that simple Joe because a free market economy where human rights are respected needs both. China is neither a free market economy, though they are embracing some captialism now as they recognize its benefits, nor do they respect basic human rights as unalienable rights.

So all other things being unchanged, of course China would prosper if all its citizens were middle class. But the fact is, without the rich PLUS a free market economy and basic human rights, no middle class is possible. There will only be rich and poor.

 

[AVG-JOE]

The answer is: tax cuts.

That's not even part of the question. The question boils down to which is better: A small aristocracy with all the money or a huge middle class with all the money?

It's a simple question. If you own stock in or are working at a manufacturing plant that depends on selling X number of units per month to keep the lights and machines on, which would you rather have as a market, 6000 Aristocrats with a few billion in the bank each or 7 billion people with middle class incomes?

Should that answer be different for Europe? For India? For America?

But the question isn't that simple Joe because a free market economy where human rights are respected needs both. China is neither a free market economy, though they are embracing some captialism now as they recognize its benefits, nor do they respect basic human rights as unalienable rights.

So all other things being unchanged, of course China would prosper if all its citizens were middle class. But the fact is, without the rich PLUS a free market economy and basic human rights, no middle class is possible. There will only be rich and poor.

I know, I know, I know!

The numbers aren't much more than illustrative and the scenario is over simplified! I never claimed to be a prophet (at least in this thread) and it was never meant to be an entrant into the box of solutions to the worlds ills.

It was meant as an exercise in extremes, like "What if all the babies prevented by The Pill suddenly showed up one day?"

It was meant to generate thought beyond the sound byte. Nothing more.

 

[Foxfyre]

That's not even part of the question. The question boils down to which is better: A small aristocracy with all the money or a huge middle class with all the money?

It's a simple question. If you own stock in or are working at a manufacturing plant that depends on selling X number of units per month to keep the lights and machines on, which would you rather have as a market, 6000 Aristocrats with a few billion in the bank each or 7 billion people with middle class incomes?

Should that answer be different for Europe? For India? For America?

But the question isn't that simple Joe because a free market economy where human rights are respected needs both. China is neither a free market economy, though they are embracing some captialism now as they recognize its benefits, nor do they respect basic human rights as unalienable rights.

So all other things being unchanged, of course China would prosper if all its citizens were middle class. But the fact is, without the rich PLUS a free market economy and basic human rights, no middle class is possible. There will only be rich and poor.

I know, I know, I know!

The numbers aren't much more than illustrative and the scenario is over simplified! I never claimed to be a prophet (at least in this thread) and it was never meant to be an entrant into the box of solutions to the worlds ills.

It was meant as an exercise in extremes, like "What if all the babies prevented by The Pill suddenly showed up one day?"

It was meant to generate thought beyond the sound byte. Nothing more.

Mission accomplish.

 

[hortysir]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

(A) is the correct answer because they would build companies and hire the 7 billion who need jobs and create an engine. If you chose (B) they would spend it and that would be that.

The money spent by the "commoners" would spur other businesses, thus creating the demand for more goods and services, thus creating jobs.

From a purely mathematical POV, (B) is the correct answer, as it involves 60k instead of the 6k in answer (A)

 

[rdean]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

Exactly where did the 7 billion get the 60K...and how would they get it again after they spent it?

The thought I just had when I read your post?

Now I see why Obama, Reid, Schumer, Pelosi, et al fool you guys so easily.

It is pathetic.

What pathetic is that people think that the wealthy want to do anything to benefit society.

Now I see why Cheney, Palin, Bachman, The Koch Brothers and Barbour fool you guys so easily.

Republicans "imagine" how things work and then work towards that end doing whatever they think is necessary to get there. You can see it in every one of their policies. Don't bother with study or data. Forget planning. Just "imagine" how it should be.

Then, when it doesn't work, instead of the least bit of "introspection", they blame everyone else.

Look at Iraq. We "freed" them and now they chant "death to America". Ungrateful bastards.

Republicans passed trillions in tax cuts with most going to millionaires and billionaires. We should have a "sparkling economy", but no, teachers and nurses have now "destroyed" the economy through "greed".

 

[Skull Pilot]

Which market would be best for the USA and the world?

A) 6,000 Chinese Aristocrats with $7 Billion each to spend or

B) 7 Billion Chinese middle class with $60,000 each to spend?

What are the implications of the thought you just had there?!?

Exactly where did the 7 billion get the 60K...and how would they get it again after they spent it?

The thought I just had when I read your post?

Now I see why Obama, Reid, Schumer, Pelosi, et al fool you guys so easily.

It is pathetic.

What pathetic is that people think that the wealthy want to do anything to benefit society.

Now I see why Cheney, Palin, Bachman, The Koch Brothers and Barbour fool you guys so easily.

And the people crying for the government to give them other peoples' money are doing it for society?

I don't think so.