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.

 

Time to Care

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




I keep hearing this presented as some sort of a new problem or worsening problem when history proves different.


I don't think it does.



This is demonstrably false. The wealth gap has always been a cycle and it has often been far worse than it is today. Look at the so-called "gilded age" on the late 1800s.


No, this is the so called "New Gilded Age". And it's not a bad analogy with all the voter suppression, lobbyism and tax avoidance going on.


As Painter tells TIME, there have been several major cycles of inequality in the U.S. since then: the mitigation of inequality during the Progressive era, the return to inequality in the 1920s, the great equalizer that was the Great Depression and the New Deal, and then the rise of inequality once again in the late 20th century. That trend has continued to this day, and Americans are now living in an era that has been called a new Gilded Age.

How American Inequality in the Gilded Age Compares to Today




posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Question:

If I am sitting here with everything I need in life and access to more of it and the ability to get it, then why should I be fussed about a handful of people who spent their lives stockpiling more money then they could every use?

Obviously, their wealth did not prevent me and others like me from achieving a comfortable life. If we can, so can others despite the evil rich.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

What voter suppression? Seriously, what voter suppression? This is one of those popular claims that has so far been accompanied by zero degrees of evidence, let alone anything proven. I'll grant you some degree of the tax avoidance accusation but, then again, have we ever lived in an era with so much tax giveaways to people paying far less into the system than they're taking from it? Talk about tax avoidance... The bottom 44% take more than they pay and the top 1% paid more than the bottom 90% combined while accounting for 38% of all taxes collected, so if they're avoiding, they're doing a pretty crappy job of it. Lobbyism, meh... again, back in the day the monopolies like Standard Oil, Rockefeller, and Carnegie OWNED the government flat out... what they wanted, they received. You can't say lobbying has yielded even remotely the same degree of control over the system as the oil, rail, and steel barons did 100+ years ago.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Question:

If I am sitting here with everything I need in life and access to more of it and the ability to get it, then why should I be fussed about a handful of people who spent their lives stockpiling more money then they could every use?

Obviously, their wealth did not prevent me and others like me from achieving a comfortable life. If we can, so can others despite the evil rich.


Exactly. If Bill Gates or Zuckerberg had no money, it wouldn't change Pubic Opinion's life one bit. In fact, the only way it would probably change is that he'd be worse off as he wouldn't benefit from their technology.

When you strip away what he is actually saying is that he wants their money. He wants their money spent on him. They give a ton of money away already, however, many leftist get mad because they may not give to what ever their cause du jour may happen to be.

People really have no idea how much money is given away by the rich. Universities, museums, opera's, libraries, homeless shelters, animal shelters, hospitals, parks, schools, etc are all possible because there are wealthy benefactors. I put far more faith in a billionaire knowing how to effectively give away their money to charity and causes than that money first going to the government.

This is a perception problem. A guy making $50k and has $150k in student loan debt sees some other person who has tens of millions. They think to themselves, if I just had that $150k it would change my world. They think the person with the money wouldn't miss it.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

I stand by what I've said - People who want wealth redistribution only say that because they think they will gain. It's a mantra of envy and greed. They don't care at all what a person they accuse of being too wealthy may already be doing for those less well off because they aren't personally benefiting and therefore, it will never be enough until and unless *they* get a slice of that pie and get to live like a king.

They want it ... just not all the work that comes with getting it.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari




If you honestly think that Progressive policies and wealth redistribution works then the migratory patterns of people in America would be from red states to blue states.


Who cares?

If you think wealth inequality never has been a problem for the social order: go ahead and enlighten me?



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Although I strongly agree with property rights and capitalist ideals, the system today is some sort of capitalist/socialist Frankenstein hybrid.

It doesn't seem logical that Earth has 3,000 people who own virtually everything while everyone else has nothing. Sounds like royalty and tyranny is very likely when people have that much power over others.

Since we have a poverty limit we should also have a rich limit, like 1 billion $, and everything after that goes to tax.

If you've made over 1 billion $ you don't need motives or incentives to make more, you should be out on your yacht enjoying life rather than wearing a suit and acting like a vampire anyways.

I dunno, but something seems really wrong with 3,000 godmen owning damn near everything when everyone else is called stupid and will never own much if anything at all.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash

Why do you care so much? Have they personally interfered with your lives?

Show me on the doll where the bad billionaire touched you ...



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion




a reply to: Lumenari

If you honestly think that Progressive policies and wealth redistribution works then the migratory patterns of people in America would be from red states to blue states.





Who cares?


I do... when I moved from a blue state to a red state our bank accounts got fatter, our available choices expanded, and our quality of life improved.

We perform the same work and same duties, but policies and laws in the red state freed up a lot more income.

When you get that real world experience under your belt your perspective changes. It was pretty eye opening.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: muzzleflash
Although I strongly agree with property rights and capitalist ideals, the system today is some sort of capitalist/socialist Frankenstein hybrid.

It doesn't seem logical that Earth has 3,000 people who own virtually everything while everyone else has nothing. Sounds like royalty and tyranny is very likely when people have that much power over others.

Since we have a poverty limit we should also have a rich limit, like 1 billion $, and everything after that goes to tax.

If you've made over 1 billion $ you don't need motives or incentives to make more, you should be out on your yacht enjoying life rather than wearing a suit and acting like a vampire anyways.

I dunno, but something seems really wrong with 3,000 godmen owning damn near everything when everyone else is called stupid and will never own much if anything at all.


They don't own EVERYTHING.

It is very logical. If you create something that has national or global appeal, it may make you worth hundreds of millions or billions of dollars.

However, remember we are talking NET WORTH, not income.

Bill Gates is worth $100 billion because he created a company that is worth almost a trillion. He owns a large portion of the company. He does not have $100 billion under his mattress in $1s and $5s. He has to sell a portion of his stake in Microsoft to get access to that money. He couldn't get $100 billion if he wanted because it would tank Microsoft stock price.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: muzzleflash

Why do you care so much? Have they personally interfered with your lives?

Show me on the doll where the bad billionaire touched you ...


22,000 children's die a day from poverty, but as long as its not affecting you personally...



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: muzzleflash

Why do you care so much? Have they personally interfered with your lives?

Show me on the doll where the bad billionaire touched you ...


Grow up, lol.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Lumenari




If you honestly think that Progressive policies and wealth redistribution works then the migratory patterns of people in America would be from red states to blue states.


Who cares?

If you think wealth inequality never has been a problem for the social order: go ahead and enlighten me?


Obviously you care, because you made a thread about wealth inequality.

You titled it "Time to Care", FFS

Now that we are a few pages in and you are all red-faced and embarrassed, suddenly you don't care?

And I need to enlighten you on wealth inequality being a problem?

So now I have to make your argument for you as well?

Congrats on your fail thread and I will let the rest of ATS beat on you for a bit.

I have a lunch reservation to make.



edit on 21-1-2020 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:02 PM
link   
This will be a little long post so hang in there.

If we zeroed everything out. And changed to a credit system of 1 credit equals 1 hour worked, would it fix it? That is to say 1 hour digging a ditch paid no more and no less than 1 hour being a doctor, lawyer, politician, CEO, etc. Does that fix it?

Let’s say right out of high school a guy gathers eggs every day. That’s his job. He has to hit several farms and ends up making 50 credits a week because he worked the extra 10 hours. So each year he makes 2600 credit instead of 2080 credits. So being up 520 he puts them in savings. In four years he has 2080 credits saved up. A whole year’s pay. And in four more years, two years pay. At 26 he decides to invest 4160 credits into a factory making cars.

These cars cost about 1040 credits to make and sell for 2080. He is able to produce and sell 100 a day. So the daily profit is 50 years pay per day. What happens to that excess money? He could invest in a second factory producing more jobs and a theoretical 100 years pay per day. Or do those credits made in profit become stolen by an authority to be handed out elsewhere?

Why would the guy spend the first 8 years of his life working harder if he couldn’t better his situation? Why would you remove job opportunity for others from a proven success story? We can replace credits, cars and eggs with any products you want? But the risk versus reward is what makes entrepreneurs. If the system disenfranchised success then why advance. There would be no car factory at all. And very few are going to give up an easy job of gathering eggs to work in a hot dirty factory building cars unless they earned 1.25 credit per hour. So they could get ahead or have more free time with a 40 hour work week for the same as gathering eggs for 50 hours a week.

Wealth and poverty are incentives when nothing else matters. You will work harder to better yourself. Just the same as you will work harder to avoid being hungry.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: muzzleflash
Although I strongly agree with property rights and capitalist ideals, the system today is some sort of capitalist/socialist Frankenstein hybrid.

It doesn't seem logical that Earth has 3,000 people who own virtually everything while everyone else has nothing. Sounds like royalty and tyranny is very likely when people have that much power over others.

Since we have a poverty limit we should also have a rich limit, like 1 billion $, and everything after that goes to tax.

If you've made over 1 billion $ you don't need motives or incentives to make more, you should be out on your yacht enjoying life rather than wearing a suit and acting like a vampire anyways.

I dunno, but something seems really wrong with 3,000 godmen owning damn near everything when everyone else is called stupid and will never own much if anything at all.


They don't own EVERYTHING.

It is very logical. If you create something that has national or global appeal, it may make you worth hundreds of millions or billions of dollars.

However, remember we are talking NET WORTH, not income.

Bill Gates is worth $100 billion because he created a company that is worth almost a trillion. He owns a large portion of the company. He does not have $100 billion under his mattress in $1s and $5s. He has to sell a portion of his stake in Microsoft to get access to that money. He couldn't get $100 billion if he wanted because it would tank Microsoft stock price.


That's why I said "dam near everything". As the cycle moves forward they will own more and more and the consumer less and less.

No one deserves this much power to lobby, this is exactly why the swamp exists. The Gators want to consolidate their power and will destroy our Constitution in the process.

The ultra wealthy are the ones trying to take your guns for a reason - so they can live as Gods while everyone else is their mindless slaves.

I just think we ought to reduce the power of the world's oligarchs.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: muzzleflash

Why do you care so much? Have they personally interfered with your lives?

Show me on the doll where the bad billionaire touched you ...


22,000 children's die a day from poverty, but as long as its not affecting you personally...


No, 22,000 children die from things that occurred while they were impoverished... big difference. If someone is poor but killed by a dictator, it wasn't the poverty that killed them.

Most of the developed world - US in particular, really has no true poverty. No one in the US is living in tin huts, favelas, distended bellies, lacks running water, electricity, etc.

Poor in America means you drive a 20 year old car and may have an Iphone 6.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




What voter suppression?


Major Study Finds The US Is An Oligarchy



You can't say lobbying has yielded even remotely the same degree of control over the system as the oil, rail, and steel barons did 100+ years ago.


I'm not sure the piece I just linked doesn't say so already. You decide.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: muzzleflash

Why do you care so much? Have they personally interfered with your lives?

Show me on the doll where the bad billionaire touched you ...


22,000 children's die a day from poverty, but as long as its not affecting you personally...


No, 22,000 children die from things that occurred while they were impoverished... big difference. If someone is poor but killed by a dictator, it wasn't the poverty that killed them.

Most of the developed world - US in particular, really has no true poverty. No one in the US is living in tin huts, favelas, distended bellies, lacks running water, electricity, etc.

Poor in America means you drive a 20 year old car and may have an Iphone 6.


That's total BS, we have homeless ppl walking around in every city.

I can't believe you haven't noticed them.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Something like half or similar number of our millions of homeless are Vets and served their nation.

They worked really hard risking their lives but oh no, they are entitled selfish pricks right? Those guys in suits are the real hard workers.

Hahaha gimme a break.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: muzzleflash

Why do you care so much? Have they personally interfered with your lives?

Show me on the doll where the bad billionaire touched you ...


22,000 children's die a day from poverty, but as long as its not affecting you personally...


No, 22,000 children die from things that occurred while they were impoverished... big difference. If someone is poor but killed by a dictator, it wasn't the poverty that killed them.

Most of the developed world - US in particular, really has no true poverty. No one in the US is living in tin huts, favelas, distended bellies, lacks running water, electricity, etc.

Poor in America means you drive a 20 year old car and may have an Iphone 6.


The OP mentions the world not just the US.

If you die from malnutrition, dirty drinking water, lack of medical care etc, and these things are caused by poverty, then yes poverty very much is responsible.
edit on 21-1-2020 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join