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.

 

Who are the 1%?

page: 3
52
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxnThe impetus of business isn't to hire people. It's to create profit and expand. Hiring is a necessary by-product of that cycle, but not the purpose of it.

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I believe that another thing you failed to take into account, is that if you look over the list of the richest people and the companies in the US, the majority of them are either in the Tech market or in finance.

These two fields do not normally require a vast overhead in personnel as they don't produce a tangible physically distributable product. Since there is no manufacturing or logistics involved, these groups can accumulate vast amounts of wealth while generating very little in the way of job growth.

So if you compare the number of jobs at a major manufacturer, like an automaker, to a company that produces a product that can be distributed online, or a financial company, you'll find a huge disparity in the number of people employed or jobs produced via profits.

So in effect, your cycle has been broken.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


I took into account the top wage earners in this country. Which according to the mantra are not paying their fair share.

If you don't know how to invest, you can pay a guy to help you figure it out, or have someone manage a money market account for you.

If you start up a netflix and hire few people and make lots of money doing it, good for you.

Again, it isn't the impetus of business to hire, it is the impetus of business to profit. Otherwise there's no point in business.

Edit:

Jobs are not produced via profits. Whatever is left after paying employees and all other bills is profit.
edit on 11-10-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
You don't cause inflation by not allowing money to flow freely. Inflation is caused by money flowing too freely and creating price ramps.

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

No inflation is created when you have too much money in circulation, and that remaining money drops in worth as a result, or because there is nothing backing up that money. (ie. If leaves were money, it would take an entire forest to buy a cup of coffee)

In this instance the former is the problem. You have WAY too much currency in the system because you have a number of people who have accumulated and are hoarding it.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
When people speak of the one percent that is a euphinism for all those who control the majority of the wealth. Of course that number is less than 1%. Probably comes down to a few ten thousand. Also when you speak of the 'one percent", people should be thinking in the terms of wealth instead of income. Not sure where the cutoff we should be concerned about should be, but in my mind I consider those with wealth above $50 million as the group that should be targeted in these discussions.

As far as taxation i think they should abolish the income tax and instead institute a wealth tax. That would it more difficult for anyone to obtain too much wealth and hence power and if they did they would be providing a bunch of benefit to society. The biggest hindrance of this would be worldwide enforcement. This is more than just an American condition.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


the evil rich right? that evil 1 % right but the federal reserve determines the value of their wealth.

back in 1913 10k was considered to be rich take that same 10k today that would be worth over 220k take 1` million agian back in 1913 would be worth 22 million their 1% is nothing what they think they is.

the terms millionaires and billionaires have lost their meanings they of all people should know that the dollar doesnt not even come close to buying what it use to.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by projectvxn
You don't cause inflation by not allowing money to flow freely. Inflation is caused by money flowing too freely and creating price ramps.

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

No inflation is created when you have too much money in circulation, and that remaining money drops in worth as a result, or because there is nothing backing up that money. (ie. If leaves were money, it would take an entire forest to buy a cup of coffee)

In this instance the former is the problem. You have WAY too much currency in the system because you have a number of people who have accumulated and are hoarding it.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


I just said almost exactly what you did using different words.


However hoarding money keeps it from circulation. Therefore it doesn't affect inflation until it is circulated.
edit on 11-10-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
Again, it isn't the impetus of business to hire, it is the impetus of business to profit. Otherwise there's no point in business.
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Unfortunately, we are now seeing how the idea of, "profit with no foresight to the greater good of the economy you operate within", pans out.

The fact is that it doesn't work. Once you get to much water on one side of the bucket, its going to have to somehow equalize. So for example, if a company keeps their employees wages at a low level for too long, but continues to produce their product and demand more money for it, eventually no one is going to be able to afford that product any longer. Then the company either has to go out of business, drop their prices, or increase their wages. Normally they drop their prices.

The problem now is that these people who are generating all this profit, are also not producing a product, so they just keep taking and taking without regard to what its doing to the system. As their profits are not made on whether or not the population can afford their product, they never have to equalize the system, and they will eventually tip over the bucket.

Make sense?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

edit on 10/11/2011 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn

Originally posted by Ghost375
They are referring to the 1% that owns 80% of the wealth.


The 1% doesn't own 80 percent of the wealth.

:shk:

Sheesh!

The 1% own roughly 34-38% of the wealth in this country. And that's not just cash. That's in property, investments, business ventures, and other assets.


I agree with your concept, but this part is incorrect.

The wealthiest 400 people in the US only account for 0.000005% of the population, but they account for more than 50% of the total wealth. The top 1% easily account for 80% of all wealth, and probably more than that!!

Studies in 2007 and 2009 both show the number above 70% and increasing rapidly.


Forbes said the combined wealth of the 400 people on this year's list is $1.5 trillion, with an average net worth of $3.8 billion. That amounts to a 12% increase from last year.

USA Today

And, during a bad economy, they are still getting richer...

Despite the stalled economy, the nation's wealthiest are worth a combined $1.53 trillion, nearly equivalent to the GDP of our neighbor Canada. Their total wealth is up 12% in the year through August 26, when we took a snapshot of everyone's net worth, meaning these affluent folks did slightly better than the markets; the S&P 500, for instance, was up 10% in that time.

Yahoo Finance

According to Univ of Santa Cruz in a study through 2007, the wealth disparity is growing exponentially from 1983 through 2007.
Study


US population has grown to a record high. The economic top one percent of the population now owns over 70% of all financial assets, an all time record.

As mentioned before, just look at the first full year of the crisis when workers lost an average of 25 percent off their 401k. During the same time period, the wealth of the 400 richest Americans increased by $30 billion, bringing their total combined wealth to $1.57 trillion, which is more than the combined net worth of 50% of the US population. Just to make this point clear, 400 people have more wealth than 155 million people combined.

So urce



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
However hoarding money keeps it from circulation. Therefore it doesn't affect inflation until it is circulated.

Money held in a bank by a hoarder is in circulation as far as calculating the worth of all money in flow, its simply not out there doing any work to stimulate the economy.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


No, because it isn't the business making a profit that is hurting the long term stability of the economy. It's the government that is doing that. Profits are GOOD for the economy. Not bad.

If we start harping on people making a profit then explain to me how we're going to get the economy moving without someone, somewhere, making a profit for themselves.

It takes money to make money. It also takes spending some hard earned money so that others may benefit as well. If we start demonizing profit we are headed for a very deep cliff...And we will fall off of it.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


In an economy worth 16 trillion a year? 1.53 trillion is 80 percent? The top 500 earners don't account for the entire 1%, and they certainly don't account for 80 percent of the wealth in the nation.


Huh?

These numbers also call into question the meaning of what you're trying to say here.

If 1.53 trillion is not 80% of GDP then they aren't making 50% of the GDP either. They most likely ARE making more than 50% of the POPULATION in this country. But that doesn't mean anything. only 53% of the population works in this country. Everyone else is either too young to work or simply on the dole paid for by the 53%.
edit on 11-10-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


They have money parked at the Federal Reserve(seriously). That money is not accounted for until it reaches the overall economy.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by projectvxn
No, because it isn't the business making a profit that is hurting the long term stability of the economy. It's the government that is doing that. Profits are GOOD for the economy. Not bad.

Its only good for the economy if its trickled back into the economy, otherwise its doing harm to the economy by sitting unused and driving the worth of the other money down.

How does money sitting stagnant, in someones bank account, stimulate anything for the economy?


Originally posted by projectvxn
If we start harping on people making a profit then explain to me how we're going to get the economy moving without someone, somewhere, making a profit for themselves.

I have no problem with people making money, I have a problem with the fact that a small percentage of this countries population has taken an unfair percentage of the total countries worth, and is sitting on it for their own greedy ends.

IMHO, to people who are at that level of affluence, money means nothing to them, and its all about power. They are exerting their power over our economy to intentionally create a feudal system. To control and crash governments, manipulate markets, to lobby laws, to control who is in office, etc...


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


Actually, the upper wealth is a real minority. When the middle and lower of the wealth starts to feel that they are not doing well, in a real democracy they should get their improvement of life that they want. We aren't getting that, because this isn't a democracy.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


Actually, the upper wealth is a real minority. When the middle and lower of the wealth starts to feel that they are not doing well, in a real democracy they should get their improvement of life that they want. We aren't getting that, because this isn't a democracy.


Indeed. It isn't a democracy. It's a constitutional republic where you can't simply demand the fruits of the labor of others simply because you want to vote it that way.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

If you're sitting with 10 billion in the bank, even though its not circulating, its still counted toward the total money in circulation. They have no idea if you plan to withdraw that 10 billion tomorrow, or what, so its still counted as being out there.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
The keen eyed reader will have noticed we've had a couple brave ATS'ers already come out of the 1%er closet in a few threads.

Wonder if they'll make their presence known here?



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by negativenihil
 


So being a one percenter is a bad thing?

I thought liberals loved small businesses.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


No they aren't. They're probably not even grossing half of that. The sad reality is that small business owners rarely make a large, or even a medium amount of money anymore. The fact is that majority of small business owners fail, just as you failed. That's why they are so rare. If you put your money back into another business, you're a fool. There's too many corporations. Unless you have a whole new angle on a business, or a rural area that needs one business badly, then you are wasting your money.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Like has been said to you in other threads, wait until the military is not paying you very well, and making your life a breeze beyond your assigned duty. The military has turned into the best deal in this country.

When you get out, you'll learn yet again that this country is #ed up. You can be a drone, or be nothing. There is no American dream. That's something we sell to immigrants, because corporate America needs those willing to take day jobs.
edit on 11-10-2011 by Evolutionsend because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join