A perfect response to the to the state of politics here on ATS

a reply to: Southern Guardian

With a topic like this, you should have been more prepared for the ad-homs, and the 'so you mean this when you wrote that' or 'you must be that if you say this one thing' , and the leaps of assumptions and the name calling....

Discussions without personal attacks are far and fewer on ats....wonder why deny ignorance is silently eradicated from the site's ethos and slogan... or there aren't any more guest speakers or weekly shows...

Good luck.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
a reply to: 3daysgone

Every single day I go on Fox News Online. Every single day there is either a black man/woman or immigrant/Mexican spotlighted for something bad they did. Every single day. So please, do not say the left this and the left that. Fox has become tabloid news and the worst offender of what you say "the left" is always doing, race baiting.

So Fox didn't cover the school shooting, or anything bad a white person does? Please. I don't watch Fox either though, because I do agree with you some what. It is just that the left seemed to have shattered the glass ceiling of hypocrisy during this election cycle. They don't care enough about DACA to even make a deal on it.

The reason people are fighting the illegals is because they are protecting what they have and to protect that which is already there to not be further divided or diluted. We have seen that it seems to make little difference between which party is in power as both seem to transfer massive amounts of $$ to the super rich, they just use different methods. Repub's do it through tax cuts while dem's do it through shady political deals/contracts, subsidies, etc. It seems that either way the middle class/poor get screwed and fighting the super rich seems to put a target on your back and they tend to try and destroy you. Even if you don't actively protest or "fight" them, just being abnormal is enough to put a target on one's back.

Fighting the super rich is like trying to swim upstream during a 1000 year flood and having to swim up Niagara Falls at the end of the river. So if people have a slice of pie that is 4oz, they don't want 10 million more people to compete for that same piece making it only 2.5-3oz or nothing at all.

people fight the fights they can and those which are actually winable. Only rarely do people take on goliath and win it seems. The only way to fix the situation would be for the population to put their differences aside and refuse to work, surround (protest) vital supply lines/corperations/gov institutions & rich people's neighborhoods/homes - but I fear that would result in martial law breaking out and then civil war would be the only option and unfortunately after seeing how some soldiers acted during Katrina and Harvey, the whole "US soldiers won't turn guns on American's" thing seems highly questionable.

So, what do you suggest we do to take the power & money back?

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Lumenari

Actually, if your income has risen 6% since 1978 you are an idiot.

That's more than 90% of the population then. I suppose we're all idiots for not becoming CEOs or wealthy elites - because the pyramid structure that is capitalism allows for everybody to become wealthy? The economy has the capacity for everybody to be at the top and wealthy?

I suppose you are retarded then since the 5.7% figure is bogus.

Minimum wage in 1978 was $2.65

Minimum wage in 2018 varies on state, but averages $10.00

An average increase of 265%.

At least attempt to do some homework before posting just straight out Marxist crap.

You know... make a change!!!!

And edited to add... yes, the capitalist economic idea does allow people that strive and sacrifice to be given the chance to get whatever they want.

The pursuit of happiness....

I know, I know.. people such as yourself that are all butthurt and marginal would rather have stuff handed to them.

Thankfully, we don't have your system in place in America.

Yet.

Question -- did you adjust for inflation? The figures given for CEO versus peon pay is usually adjusted for inflation over the decades to make it as comparable as possible.

If you ddn't adjust for inflation, you can't say "Checkmate, bitch!" yet.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Plotus

Clearly you haven't lost your job to illegals who will work for $8 when the prevailing wage for your trade is $21,

And who made the decision to take your job away and give it to the illegal immigrant? The illigal didn't hire himself did he?

And yet we keep on giving billions in tax cuts, no questions asked, to these same businesses.

Blame the illegal right?

Facts you say?

You know there's no point in arguing with a mindset like that member has, rock logic doesn't budge it just stubbornly stays unwaivered.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Illegal immigration is part of how they keep all that wealth.

www.politico.com...

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Illegal immigration is part of how they keep all that wealth.

www.politico.com...

Immigration redistributes wealth from those who compete with immigrants to those who use immigrants—from the employee to the employer.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The extreme poverty people cant get any poorer. But the 80% compared to the 20% are "poor". And we are getting poorer. And this de facto (upward) redistribution of wealth is by design. And debates about minorities distracts from that. While 'cant criticize "capitalism" (robberbarronism)' arguments protects Them.

The poor are not getting poorer. The number of people existing below the international poverty line has been cut in half over the last two decades alone. Sure, people exploit loopholes, rent-seek, and cheat at the expense of others, but that is more the exception than the rule.

Wealth isn’t a fixed pie where some guy with a monocle takes a bigger slice leaving only crumbs for the poor. Wealth expands. The reason a few people are more wealthy today than before Reagan is not because of tax-breaks or legislation, but for a variety of reasons, one of which included technology, making it easier to start and manage companies. Look at Zuckerberg; he started Facebook from his dorm room. Now he is one of the richest people in the world.

They don’t always start out wealthy. There is quite a bit of income mobility, in one bracket one year, in another the next, And they create wealth, they do not steal it. When one starts a company he also creates jobs, produces products and services, pays taxes, and so on, all of which weren’t there before.

You can't prevent income inequality without preventing people from getting rich, and that seems to me a horrific and unjust idea. What we can do is help the poor and make economic mobility easier, which we’ve already been doing and are getting better at doing.

The fear of Income inequality is overblown in my opinion, and is the last ditch effort of socialists to seize money and power.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If you're going to bring in the entire 'third world' to draw up a graph then sure that might work.

But bring us a graph for the US, and one for the EU, that shows that the rich arent getting richer and the poor arent getting poorer.

mmkthnx

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If you're going to bring in the entire 'third world' to draw up a graph then sure that might work.

But bring us a graph for the US, and one for the EU, that shows that the rich arent getting richer and the poor arent getting poorer.

mmkthnx

It’s a global graph, as in the entire world. If you want to limit wealth and economics to certain borders, that’s fine, but it’s not how the world works.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
They don’t always start out wealthy. There is quite a bit of income mobility, in one bracket one year, in another the next, And they create wealth, they do not steal it. When one starts a company he also creates jobs, produces products and services, pays taxes, and so on, all of which weren’t there before.

About the only major income mobility I've much noticed the past 20 years is tech companies, in particular the types that write a website that is a major hit and millions upon millions of people use it, it doesnt require a product the be manufactured, user generated content in particular, etc.

It used to be being an inventor was the big thing a person could hit it big. Not tech giant big, but big none the less. Now that avenue has been almost completely shut down by corruption. Not to mention lopsided trade policies lets China run amok with intellectual property rights tot he degree that to patent something means to be uploading Chinese MFG'ers your designs so they can go make it and our government wont do a damn thing to nudge them honest.

So then what, oh go to college! Go check out student loan disaster where for some obscene portion of everyone that went that route the past 20 years when they got out of school there was no job, and even if there had been the monthly payment to the loans their new job didnt actually increase their monthly income enough to pay it and not be going backwards in income.

Then there's all sorts of little businesses people can still go and do, but there the regulations tend to be stacked so that the big boys they have the cheddar and umph to wade thru all that muck but the little guy tends to not have much of a chance. Especially not when working a job where everything is setup so that everyone works -everything is only open- the same hours (kind of like how people have to take time off work to go do banking).

Then there's industries stacked up to ensure little guys dont have a chance. You're good at building computers? Go try to start that business and try to compete with Dell etc. Let me know how you can ever stay in business with that pesky Windows license pricetag that to you is hundreds of dollars but to them its more like $20.

What else? Oh, if you're a shark sure you can get into stock market type BS. That whole big world of angles. And you can also try your hand at being a professional casino gambler. Not much difference. Many get left in the dust without a dime trying to make that work. Oh but SOME do become millionaires real quick. And make it last. SOME.

And thats all just 'getting rich' stuff. Where RICH doesnt even hardly compare to WEALTH. Where the fact is majority of all wealth is inherited, not achieved.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

When 'half' the world is in intense / extreme poverty, and that world isnt "our world", then sure one can float on cloud 9 with unicorns and puppydogs that 'everythings' getting better. But when you look at whats happening in our world, we're heading towards the same kind of distribution of wealth as the third world.

The third world for all intensive purposes 'can only' improve its already so bad, or it was.

We here in the world of the middle class, we're losing. Thats the already clear and present trend and thats with robots taking half our jobs in the next 10-20 years.

The third world doesnt tend to have a middle class.

And thats where we're headed so long as we're all divided, keep telling ourselves everythings okay because lookie the third world doesnt suck quite as bad as 10 years ago (although not my much RIGHT), label criticisms of robberbarrons as 'socialism', and so on.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Exactly. So people should stop bitching at wealth redistribution to he rich when you support the policies that support it.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

When 'half' the world is in intense / extreme poverty, and that world isnt "our world", then sure one can float on cloud 9 with unicorns and puppydogs that 'everythings' getting better. But when you look at whats happening in our world, we're heading towards the same kind of distribution of wealth as the third world.

The third world for all intensive purposes 'can only' improve its already so bad, or it was.

We here in the world of the middle class, we're losing. Thats the already clear and present trend and thats with robots taking half our jobs in the next 10-20 years.

The third world doesnt tend to have a middle class.

And thats where we're headed so long as we're all divided, keep telling ourselves everythings okay because lookie the third world doesnt suck quite as bad as 10 years ago (although not my much RIGHT), label criticisms of robberbarrons as 'socialism', and so on.

Actually it’s only 11% of the world, not half. As mentioned, it was 44% in 1980. So while you worry that a kiosk might replace the person selling your burgers, there are actual advances being made in eradicating extreme poverty throughout the world.

People are getting richer, technology more advanced, and opportunities are growing. We are healthier, less miserable, more educated, live longer, have higher standards of living, than during any time in human history.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

What I took from your OP is this...

The very wealthy, as a demographic, are getting wealthier every year regardless of austerity or recessions. The increases have occurred through both Democrat and Republican administrations and no matter what the majority party is in either Senate or Congress.

In that context, migration, minority cultures and skin colour are lower down the pecking order of economic threats to the common person than the corporations and wealthy families.

^^^ If any of that is accurate, it's hard to understand why your OP was shredded like a paper target at a gun range.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Well trying to survive is a whole lot harder when you don’t keep your legs closed. Illegal or not.

Just saying it’s the truth.

No, no... we should feel privileged to support their big beautiful families. Why should they have to learn basic survival 101, when they have us?

You're not paying attention to the "SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS!"

See, these immigrants never had the benefit of an education system to teach them right from wrong, so how are they supposed to know??

CHECK YOUR WHITE PRIVILEGE. And continue supporting your future replacements with less bitching!

a reply to: Kandinsky

Correct Kandinsky.

Sorry not sure if you were being sarcastic on the last part of your post or if you agree.

I'm not saying these issues with illegal migration, minority crimes etc. are not issues we need to address. I'm saying they fall well below the matter of corportate welfare and the wealthy elite growing in their portion of wealth, while we here below remain stagnant. It doesn't seem to even be on the radar for many on here at ATS... in fact we seem to jump at the idea of tax cuts for the wealthy. We have our priorities completely wrong, and this may be attributed to ideological biases, racial biases etc.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

No sarcasm. I come across as dry and probably an asshole when it's not how I mean to be. It's why I always add smilies. They obviously don't work...

Perhaps you are also lost in translation? You're saying one thing and people are hearing something totally different.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

When 'half' the world is in intense / extreme poverty, and that world isnt "our world", then sure one can float on cloud 9 with unicorns and puppydogs that 'everythings' getting better. But when you look at whats happening in our world, we're heading towards the same kind of distribution of wealth as the third world.

The third world for all intensive purposes 'can only' improve its already so bad, or it was.

We here in the world of the middle class, we're losing. Thats the already clear and present trend and thats with robots taking half our jobs in the next 10-20 years.

The third world doesnt tend to have a middle class.

And thats where we're headed so long as we're all divided, keep telling ourselves everythings okay because lookie the third world doesnt suck quite as bad as 10 years ago (although not my much RIGHT), label criticisms of robberbarrons as 'socialism', and so on.

Actually it’s only 11% of the world, not half. As mentioned, it was 44% in 1980. So while you worry that a kiosk might replace the person selling your burgers, there are actual advances being made in eradicating extreme poverty throughout the world.

People are getting richer, technology more advanced, and opportunities are growing. We are healthier, less miserable, more educated, live longer, have higher standards of living, than during any time in human history.

It's kind of nice, being poor by western standards, on food stamps, etc, but simply due to freely available technology, I live better (correction: more comfortably/conveniently. As far as "better" I wouldn't know and besides that's subjective) than almost every king or emporer I have ever read about in history.

Plumbing is nice. No unpleasant smells go into My Royal Nostrils! Medical technology is good to have. Kings died of things I can cure without barely interrupting my day. I'm aware of global happenings and can broadcast my thoughts more efficiently than they ever could.

There are problems because, right now, humanity is,like a kid in a candy store with our technology. I think future generations will learn from our mistakes and strive to live a life in balance with nature and technology.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Southern Guardian

No sarcasm. I come across as dry and probably an asshole when it's not how I mean to be. It's why I always add smilies. They obviously don't work...

Perhaps you are also lost in translation? You're saying one thing and people are hearing something totally different.

The reason the thread didn't go over well was they had an opportunity to unite both sides against a common enemy, but instead used hyperbole in order to "score a few points" for their team, and take the other side down a few notches. I hope it was worth it. Is anyone even keeping score?

I remember when AT§ was united in our understanding that the media at large has been compromised long ago and cannot be trusted. When 90% of the corporate owned media is united in an unpredented frenzy against one man, you'd think that should raise a few red flags...

The ENTIRE "EVIL" gang, D.C., HOLLYWOOD, Corporate, m.i.c., INTEL, Globalist EMPIRE is against him, and long time members are on board with that???

They were genius in putting Hillary against him. Nobody can stand seeing a loudmouth obnoxious white privilege male "beat up on" a poor old woman who was just trying to help the disadvantaged of our world...

If he had gone up against Sanders, the psychological effect would have been diffetent, because then he (Trump) would not have "taken away our first female And first lgbt president" from us...

How they managed to turn ATŠ members against their own instincts is beyond me, but it's something I will never forget... the people had a chance to be united against the old ancient adversaries, but, "politics" took over and everyone lined up against each other just like the civil war days, brother against brother.