It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Big Shot Limo-Libs talk about Income Inequality

page: 2
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

A lot of groups out there are like this unfortunately. However, leftists seem to be on the extreme end when it comes to this issue. Like Bernie Sanders, or Al Gore. Bernie with his expensive "homes" (mansions) and Al Gore claiming we're to blame for global warming yet has private jets fly him around the globe and has special cars just for his suitcases.




posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: Grambler


Whatever you want to think. I live in Cali, and its fantastic. Also wasn't it the Republicans who were recently busted taking privet jets at the taxpayers expense to VACATION. Yes, yes it was indeed. You are the pot calling the kettle black.








I assume you arent want of the many homeless in California then.

www.latimes.com...

www.latimes.com...

www.bizjournals.com...

But yes, as long as things are sunshine and rainbows for you, thats all that matters, right?

As far as republicans, sure a lot of wealthy hypocrites there too. But they arent the ones sitting on their moral high horse saying how we need all of the things I mentioned, such as open borders, while living in gated communities.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp

I recommend reading and listening to Jordan Peterson.

He describbes George Orwells book The Road to Wigan Peer.

Orwell, who was a socialist and concerned with workers roghts, wrote the first half of the book that described the disgusting horrible conditions miners lived in. It is horrific.

The next half of the book is very surprising. He discusses how all of these elite acdemics and wealthy that went on and on about the plight of the workers actually didnt care at all about the workers. Instead, they were driven by hatred of the wealthy and elite above them.

That is what I think is happening today.

All of these social justice warriors and these hollywood and silicon valley wealthy people railing about these things dont actually care about them; they just hate people that they perceive as better or different than them.

Thats why these same people that are concerned about income inequality can look at some of the poorest areas in the country in "fly over country" and have such hatred for these poor people, because they have the wrong ideology.

Its the same reason that sjw's that decry bullying and violence will immediately resort to bullying and violence against those they disagree with.

Its the same reason that these wealthy that proscribe open borders and diversity live in gated homogeneous communities.

Its not about wanting to fix these problems, its about virtue signaling to get more power for themselves.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:35 AM
link   
These people cannot see they are part of the problem in this issue. Their blind, hopefully their sight will be restored, but do not count on it. Often the kids of people like this go the opposite way, they see their parents problems and wind up better. But sometimes the blindness is passed on generation to generation and this kind of people usually like to hang out with others just like themselves. It is probably a mental disease.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

It's what Grambler describes above and its roots lie in plain old envy.

Instead of learning how to be content with the things we have, we've been taught to keep up with the Joneses. Well, not everyone is able to do that, so when you can't keep up with them, you start to covet (to use the Biblical term), and when you covet, it leads to bad stuff like wanting to destroy the Joneses. You start to hate them for what they are that you can't be for whatever reason.

This works on all kinds of levels, and the political class has figured out how to manipulate it for votes by using it to create problems only they can solve. The politicians can leverage power to tear down those Joneses for you.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: rickymouse

It's what Grambler describes above and its roots lie in plain old envy.

Instead of learning how to be content with the things we have, we've been taught to keep up with the Joneses. Well, not everyone is able to do that, so when you can't keep up with them, you start to covet (to use the Biblical term), and when you covet, it leads to bad stuff like wanting to destroy the Joneses. You start to hate them for what they are that you can't be for whatever reason.

This works on all kinds of levels, and the political class has figured out how to manipulate it for votes by using it to create problems only they can solve. The politicians can leverage power to tear down those Joneses for you.


I remember when keeping up with the Joneses was considered something not to do. Maybe people did not properly teach this too their kids, because I see so many people wasting their money to buy things to impress others nowadays it is kind of sickening. People even start beautification committees in towns to try to force everyone to feel they need to plant flowers. Lately they have been complaining about people's gardens as being unsightly in the falls too, well, potatoes need to die off to set the skin and carrots get better if the tops dry out a bit. But this is unacceptable, the people cannot even throw the weeds anywhere. It is all right to put manure in your flower bed, but not in a garden.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

And again you hit it square between the eyes. And I do listen to JP. From an ideological perspective I pretty much find him extremely interesting, and on occasion actually astounding.

Considering the pathetic state of academia, it's pretty hard to miss it when you see one who can actually see through the liberal fog, and sees what is ACTUALLY going on. Not to mention the fact that he has a tendency to reduce damn near every liberal interviewer that takes a shot at him to a pathetic, quivering mass, at least from an intellectual standpoint, if not a physical one.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Here is another example. I have known many environmentalist that are academic sorts. Never mind their frequent jet setting lifestyle while they complain about the carbon foot prints of others. But look at what have they actually done to help the environment short of pontificating and demanding other act differently. In most cases very little.

Conversely, hands down the people I have known who actually have done the most to help the environment are hunters. These people often with little fanfare spend much of their life not only supporting real projects to clean and help the environment, but also spend much of their personal lives in the wilderness and attempting to make it better.

Yet the former group of academics absolutely despises the hunter types (in most cases). Why is that?

Its because its not about actually helping the environment for many of them, its about pushing and ideology and consolidating power.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Classic progressive mindset.

As victor David hanson puts it, they prescribe a utopia that they will never have the misfortune of having to live in.

They push all of these policies about open borders for us pleabs, while they live in gated communities.

The tell us we need to pay more for fuel because of global warming while they travel on jets.

No guns for us while they have armed guards.

We need to pay more in taxes, while they use every tax break they can.

We need to give up our luxuries to help the poor, while they vacation on their second lake front houses.

All you need to do is look at their Mecca, California, and see how the extravagant wealth that makes the state one of the richest also has the most homelessness and poverty.

These people are hypocrites and liars.
I have to disagree with you on income inequality. The arguments are often misrepresented by the right.

What is being said is that due to reaganomics and deregulation, since the late 70's real wages have been stagnant for all but the very top pinnacle of society. That data is there for all to see. Meanwhile, gdp/capita or production has been steadily rising. None of that extra money or dividends are going to the vast majority of people including even upper middle or lower upper class.

Hence, the argument is NOT that there should be no wealthy people nor limousines. It's simply that the dividends of increased production should be shared more relatively with society in the forms of wages that reflect that and better investments in things such as education or health care.

Therefore, the argument "but those liberals are wealthy or showed up in limousines" fails prima facie.

That argument is only going to fly in an echo chamber.

Now you can talk about hypocritical or corrupt liberals in other ways. I'm all for that.

Lets talk about jets and global warming now. If you are a senior leader politically or business wise, you are going to have to travel whether to negotiations or planning meetings. Those happen all over the world. The goal is NOT to stop travel, especially necessary travel, it's to make entire systems more sustainable from industry to travel to agriculture.

Hence, it will improve your guys' credibility if you don't create these straw man, misrepresentative arguments on these fronts.

edit on 20-3-2018 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2018 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2018 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2018 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp

I read his book 12 rules for life, and it was amazing.

He is an intellectual far beyond my abilities, but he has put into words something I have always believed; we are all responsible for our own lives. Yes, this beyond our control, often very tragic and unfair will happen, but we must taken responsibility for how we react to these inevitable situations.

I need to get my own house in order before demanding other people change things.

This is anathema to what the people mentioned in the OP believe. They feel that they can prescribe laws and behaviors for other people that they themselves are above having to follow.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: Grambler


Whatever you want to think. I live in Cali, and its fantastic. Also wasn't it the Republicans who were recently busted taking privet jets at the taxpayers expense to VACATION. Yes, yes it was indeed. You are the pot calling the kettle black.








Ummm...I used to live in Cali...it was anything but fantastic...I'd be out in the Japanese garden...(my backyard)...trimming the bonsai trees...or relaxing in the in-ground hot tub with the waterfall...when a police helicopter would fly over slow and low and shine it's spotlight down while blasting from the loud hailer..."Get into your house...lock the doors and don't come out"...that was at least twice a week...

Lovely Sacramento...

Then there was SanFran...not to mention Modesto...but the crown jewel of all...Stockton...

Yessir...Cali is a great place to be...from...







YouSir



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz
Well would you rather rich people not talk about income inequality?

I mean for heaven's sake guys, you've got millionaires and billionaires who have absolutely zero interest in poor people. And you're all raging on rich people who DO care at least a little bit?

That's just pathetic, sorry.


If they did care, they'd do more than offer hot air and empty promises.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Grambler
Classic progressive mindset.

As victor David hanson puts it, they prescribe a utopia that they will never have the misfortune of having to live in.

They push all of these policies about open borders for us pleabs, while they live in gated communities.

The tell us we need to pay more for fuel because of global warming while they travel on jets.

No guns for us while they have armed guards.

We need to pay more in taxes, while they use every tax break they can.

We need to give up our luxuries to help the poor, while they vacation on their second lake front houses.

All you need to do is look at their Mecca, California, and see how the extravagant wealth that makes the state one of the richest also has the most homelessness and poverty.

These people are hypocrites and liars.
I have to disagree with you on income inequality. The arguments are often misrepresented by the right.

What is being said is that due to reaganomics and deregulation, since the late 70's real wages have been stagnant for all but the very top pinnical of society. That data is there for all to see. Meanwhile, gdp/capita or production has been steadily rising. None of that extra money or dividends are going to the vast majority of people including even upper middle or lower upper class.

Hence, the argument is NOT that there should be no wealthy people not limousines. It's simply that the dividends of increased production should be shared more with society in the forms of wages that reflect that and better investments in things such as education or health care.

Therefore, the argument "but doe liberals at wealthy or showed up in limousines" fails prima facie.

That argument is only going to fly in an echo chamber.


Youo correctly outline a fact, that income inequality is rapidly growing, and neatly slip in your opinion on the cause, reagan.

I would submit that the cause is much bigger than just him.

But I could go on all day with that debate.

To the real crux of your argument, of course the people in the OP arent saying therre canyt be wealthy.

Instead, they decry many of the people who benefit from wealth inequality, while they themselves are some of the biggest beneficiaries, and have done nothing tyo change that.

How many houses does Bernie need to live a comfortable life? Yet I have seen him tell small business owners that can barely afford to give themselves a wage that they need to give their employees more. Well why doesnt bernie give his second house to the poor? I am sure he and his wife could live comfortably off of 100 grand a year, so why not give the rest to the poor. The same with the rest of these limo liberals.

Because they feel entitled to their money. It always the other guy thats the problem.

Like hollywood lecturing the country on morality and sexism, all the while covering up actual rape and abuse of women.

Like students at Yale or Harvard, some of the most privileged people in existence, railing against the 1 Percent.

I have seen this exact attitude even here on ATS by some.

"The amount of money and privilege I have is totally ok and legit. However, anyone with slightly more than me is a pig that is greedy, and needs to give up this privilege."

So many of the wealthy liberals concerned with income inequality live in California, and have almost complete political control over that state. yet income inequality is worse there than anywhere? Why is that?

Its because they dont care about the inequality at all, they merely use this as a tool to attack opponents and get power.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: rickymouse

Here is another example. I have known many environmentalist that are academic sorts. Never mind their frequent jet setting lifestyle while they complain about the carbon foot prints of others. But look at what have they actually done to help the environment short of pontificating and demanding other act differently. In most cases very little.

Conversely, hands down the people I have known who actually have done the most to help the environment are hunters. These people often with little fanfare spend much of their life not only supporting real projects to clean and help the environment, but also spend much of their personal lives in the wilderness and attempting to make it better.

Yet the former group of academics absolutely despises the hunter types (in most cases). Why is that?


Its because its not about actually helping the environment for many of them, its about pushing and ideology and consolidating power.


Exactly right, but not all hunters are good for environmentalism. Many do try to keep the biosystem in decent shape but then you get the ones who trash everything to get what they want. There are hunting and fishing clubs around here that promote good animal husbandry practices and parctical harvesting of the wildlife. Their rules are much more stringent than the DNR sometimes and the DNR looks to these groups sometimes for input. Managing an area is actually good, too many preditors can cause a lot of problems, not enough can also cause issues.

These pushy power hungry people most often are the ones people see because they are shoving stuff down the publics throat.


it seems like when these big shots get some power, they make things way to expensive and this often leads to an opposite effect of what they say is going to happen. Give a good idea to these people and they will make it expensive and bad for most everyone except a few rich people or corporations they know. It is just like corn gas, what a joke, that is the worst thing possible for our environment and cars get worse gas mileage on that oxygenated fuel. They add water to the alcohol to keep the octane correct.
edit on 20-3-2018 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14


Lets talk about jets and global warming now. If you are a senior leader politically or business wise, you are going to have to travel whether to negotiations or planning meetings. Those happen all over the world. The goal is NOT to stop travel, especially necessary travel, it's to make entire systems more sustainable from industry to travel to agriculture.

Hence, it will improve your guys' credibility if you don't create these staw man, misrepresentative arguments on these fronts.


Many times flights arent necessary, they are just a convenience. Have they never heard of buses? Is it necessary to show up in a limo that uses far more fuel than a prius or together on a bus? Can they not fly commercial instead of having private jets that burn so much unnecessary energy?

But hey, these people know they are morally superior, so they deserve to travel in luxury. They can criticize others for their energy use because they are better than those others, so if they use more energy, its ok.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

It is the conservation v. preservation mindset.

The hunter is a conservationist. He enjoys the land and bounty he gets from it and wants to conserve it for this reason. It has value to him. The last thing he wants to do is destroy it or see it destroyed. Yes, he harvests from it, but a good hunter (or fisherman -- I fall in there) wants to make sure the habitat and stocks will always be there for him (or her) and for posterity. To that end, you only take what you need. You take responsibly when you take (i.e. only individuals of certain size/age and only so many), and you do what you can to leave the land as you found it. You also do what you can to share stakes in habitats and conserve them for the use of animals.

Preservationists want to put foil wrap over the land so that none can touch it.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: YouSir

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: Grambler


Whatever you want to think. I live in Cali, and its fantastic. Also wasn't it the Republicans who were recently busted taking privet jets at the taxpayers expense to VACATION. Yes, yes it was indeed. You are the pot calling the kettle black.








Ummm...I used to live in Cali...it was anything but fantastic...I'd be out in the Japanese garden...(my backyard)...trimming the bonsai trees...or relaxing in the in-ground hot tub with the waterfall...when a police helicopter would fly over slow and low and shine it's spotlight down while blasting from the loud hailer..."Get into your house...lock the doors and don't come out"...that was at least twice a week...

Lovely Sacramento...

Then there was SanFran...not to mention Modesto...but the crown jewel of all...Stockton...

Yessir...Cali is a great place to be...from...







YouSir
I disagree. I'm from nor cal and the bay.

Still gorgeous and has amazing vibes.

Nothing really beats the redwoods, coast, Yosemite, Lake Tahoe.

I live in the northeast now. Total #hole in comparison.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


Lots of Congressmen take Ubers. Rep. Devin Nunes comes to mind.

edit on 3/20/2018 by carewemust because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

In the days of telecommuniting, if you are serious about carbon footprint ... do they really need to jet off to fabulous vacation locales? Couldn't they just "Go To Meeting?"

Husband works for a multinational and his region is SE Asia now. He does teleconferencing all the time. He's having meetings at 8, 9, and 10pm in our house.

I fail to see why they cannot do likewise.
edit on 20-3-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14


Lets talk about jets and global warming now. If you are a senior leader politically or business wise, you are going to have to travel whether to negotiations or planning meetings. Those happen all over the world. The goal is NOT to stop travel, especially necessary travel, it's to make entire systems more sustainable from industry to travel to agriculture.

Hence, it will improve your guys' credibility if you don't create these staw man, misrepresentative arguments on these fronts.


Many times flights arent necessary, they are just a convenience. Have they never heard of buses? Is it necessary to show up in a limo that uses far more fuel than a prius or together on a bus? Can they not fly commercial instead of having private jets that burn so much unnecessary energy?

But hey, these people know they are morally superior, so they deserve to travel in luxury. They can criticize others for their energy use because they are better than those others, so if they use more energy, its ok.

I agree that many of them could fly commercial to be consistent. For some such as senior politicians, often they aren't given a choice due to security.

Buses? That's a bit funny. How are you going to get from DC to Geneva for a major meeting?

I would agree that they should do everything possible to reduce their travel impact.







 
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join