Why we must rid ourselves of the 1 percent

This explains it all about how the 1 percent harms the country. I did not feel comfortable quoting the entire article because I thought it might violate some rule or something. Please read the whole thing if you have a chance.

That’s what the wealthiest 1 percent do to us a nation: It’s just impossible to appreciate our affluence while other people are allowed to have so much more than us.

Sure, we could instead compare ourselves to the poor in other nations who live on a dollar a day or the poor throughout history who lacked all the freedoms, opportunity and technology we have -- but it’s too depressing to think about those people. Instead, we just need to do something about the wealthiest 1 percent.

Some might say one person’s income doesn’t affect another’s, and people should only worry about improving their own finances, but this is ignorant of how math works: None of us can get ahead while the 1 percent are around.

Let’s say you had two apples and another person -- let’s call him “Rich” -- also had two apples. If you then got one more apple and Rich got 80 more apples, would you now have more apples? No, you’d have fewer apples -- fewer than that other guy who has an unfair number of apples!

See, the wealthiest 1 percent prevent us from getting ahead because any time we improve our incomes, we spend more on businesses and services, and guess who that helps? The 1 percent. Getting ahead just isn’t worth the knowledge that the rich are getting richer.

There’s no point in working hard to try to become one of the 1 percent ourselves, because what’s the chance of that happening? One in 100? Who would play a lottery with odds that bad?

No, instead of working hard, the 99 percent can only sit and protest on Wall Street until the wealthiest 1 percent are torn down.



Read more: www.nypost.com...

Say Rich, got his apples from his tree. That's why he has 82 apples. What is being suggested is that a third party, lets call him "Barack" takes 80 of Rich's apples and distributes them to 40 people who have no apples. Then Barack finds out that there are another 200 people with no apples. So he goes to Rich's tree and can't reach the apples at the top of the tree so he cuts down the tree to get to those apples. By the time Barack is finished 500 people have 2 apples each. All fine and good, except for one thing, where does Barack get more apples at next year?

anyone with any cognitive thinking, and an unbiased/unself centered view on society, can see that rich people are not the problem, profits are not the problem, capitalism without corruption is not the problem...

hell who can say they too would not want to be rich themselves given the chance

the PROBLEM is that all the money in the world is being systematically funneled out of everyone's pocket to a select few, that are hungry with greed the likes of which I didn't think could exist but it does

its not that the worlds currency is shrinking in quantity or getting scarce like an over fished shore line, its that all the worlds currency in getting sucked into the accounts of this so called 1%

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Say Rich, got his apples from his tree. That's why he has 82 apples. What is being suggested is that a third party, lets call him "Barack" takes 80 of Rich's apples and distributes them to 40 people who have no apples. Then Barack finds out that there are another 200 people with no apples. So he goes to Rich's tree and can't reach the apples at the top of the tree so he cuts down the tree to get to those apples. By the time Barack is finished 500 people have 2 apples each. All fine and good, except for one thing, where does Barack get more apples at next year?

Well Barack will just find someone elses tree to get the apples from. Rich is not the only person on Earth with an apple tree. Plus look how people like Rich are making people feel bad about themselves for having no apple tree or apples at all.

Until Barack runs out of people with apple trees.

Originally posted by all answers exist
anyone with any cognitive thinking, and an unbiased/unself centered view on society, can see that rich people are not the problem, profits are not the problem, capitalism without corruption is not the problem...

hell who can say they too would not want to be rich themselves given the chance

the PROBLEM is that all the money in the world is being systematically funneled out of everyone's pocket to a select few, that are hungry with greed the likes of which I didn't think could exist but it does

its not that the worlds currency is shrinking in quantity or getting scarce like an over fished shore line, its that all the worlds currency in getting sucked into the accounts of this so called 1%

Right So the only fair thing to do is to take money out of the 1% 's bank accounts until they are part of the 99%. Then I guess we will be the 100%.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Until Barack runs out of people with apple trees.

Then we will all be together. The 100% with an equal number of apples. Then Barack can move to the people with Orange trees. Plus when the 1% run out of apples and all the apple trees are gone they will want more apples so they will plant more apple tree seeds. Then when we realise what they have done we will take all of those apples. We can bring them a glass of apple juice while we watch them plant them, knowing that we will end up with our fair share of those apples too.

reply to post by tHEpROGRESSIVE


People missing the satire in 5...4....3...2....1

Starred and Flagged for a scathing bit of journalism.

If you got rid of the top 1%, then the people right underneath the top 1% would simply take their places and continue to exert this kind of influence on the world.

The problems are:
a) People are afraid of people with more - more money, more land, more wealth, more material objects, more status. Therefore, those who have the most, regardless of what "the most" really is, are going to exert influence no matter who they are or what they have, because everyone else, no matter how they hate the elite, will bow to their money.
b) Our profit-based capitalist system naturally ensures that some will have none while some will have it all.

Therefore, if we continue with the capitalist based system, the top 1% will continue screwing over the rest of the world, no matter even if we get rid of this particular 1%. Since the beginning of surplus agriculture, those with the most have ruled those with the least. Our technology is different now and the people are different elites, but those with the most have always controlled those with the least. So, getting rid of the elites won't change anything, because our system is such that new elites will simply take their place.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Until Barack runs out of people with apple trees.

Atlas shrugged anyone?

reply to post by spacekc929


So what kind of system should we replace capitalism with so that we make sure that nobody makes it to the 1%? We need a good system that creates a race to the bottom instead of the top.

There will ALWAYS be a top 1% which the bottom 50% will always be jealous of. From Cain and Able to whomever will be the lucky last two people on the planet.

Give a socialist a desert and they'll eventually run out of sand.
- bumper sticker

et’s say you had two apples and another person -- let’s call him “Rich” -- also had two apples. If you then got one more apple and Rich got 80 more apples, would you now have more apples? No, you’d have fewer apples -- fewer than that other guy who has an unfair number of apples!

This must be the new generation fuzzy math I here about. I always thought 2+1=3? How is that not more and equates to less? Life isn't fair. Life is what you make of it yourself. The government isn't going to help me accomplish fairness or my goals in life. Do something to improve yourself.

Originally posted by tHEpROGRESSIVE
reply to post by spacekc929

 

So what kind of system should we replace capitalism with so that we make sure that nobody makes it to the 1%? We need a good system that creates a race to the bottom instead of the top.

one could argue we currently do BOTH now, given the fact that we are not really a true capitalistic economy and with entitlement programs that redistribute taxpayers money

there will always be a 1% type of class, its just the government stopped doing its job a long time ago and starting working in the reverse direction, in terms of it's the governments JOB to ensure that the gap between the rich and the middle class was not to ridiculously big

reply to post by tHEpROGRESSIVE


I am not sure I know the answer to the question of what system should be used. Perhaps we should just go back to caveman days and stop with the attitude of "more more more!" I mean, the reason we started farming was because we were so worried about not having enough food that we decided we needed to create extra (surplus) food - but then those who had the most land had the most surplus food, and were able to control everyone else, who were simply trying to get a small piece of food. I am not sure that in our present mindset that there is a system that would work, but personally, I would like to see us undertake a change of consciousness and learn to live in harmony with the planet, rather than trying to work against the planet (ie, through farming and infrastructure and the like). There is enough food naturally available for us, wild game and berries and the like, and we don't really need to farm. Animals do it all the time in all sorts of environments - we could do it too. But I don't see that as a current possibility - we are steeped in technology and love of abundance and materialism and all sorts of other ideas that make it impossible. I am not excluding myself from this either, I think I am not ready as a person of this culture to live in the way I am describing, but I would hope that someday humans can come back to cherishing Nature rather than fighting Her.

Originally posted by tHEpROGRESSIVE
This explains it all about how the 1 percent harms the country. I did not feel comfortable quoting the entire article because I thought it might violate some rule or something. Please read the whole thing if you have a chance.

I know this is not what you are hoping to hear...although most likely dozens of posters will come after me who will agree with this torches and pitchforks view...kill the monster !!

That’s what the wealthiest 1 percent do to us a nation: It’s just impossible to appreciate our affluence while other people are allowed to have so much more than us.

What they "do" to us? Is any time taken to mention what they do "for" us? Things like create companies that we work for...or can buy stuff from...or pay the taxes that support the services the less fortunate enjoy...or build the public infrastructure that we all use every day.

The second sentence is just plain balmy I am afraid. There is no ceiling on affluence...the money supply, and affluence in general is open-ended. The more affluent all of those around me get, the better off I will be in almost every way...no matter if I am a business person, a wage earner, or someone in need of social assistance.

Sure, we could instead compare ourselves to the poor in other nations who live on a dollar a day or the poor throughout history who lacked all the freedoms, opportunity and technology we have -- but it’s too depressing to think about those people. Instead, we just need to do something about the wealthiest 1 percent.

It is too depressing to see how much better off we are than the average citizen of Earth...now or at any time in the past? That is depressing? More uplifting I would say...we've come a long way baby !!

Some might say one person’s income doesn’t affect another’s, and people should only worry about improving their own finances, but this is ignorant of how math works: None of us can get ahead while the 1 percent are around.

Let’s say you had two apples and another person -- let’s call him “Rich” -- also had two apples. If you then got one more apple and Rich got 80 more apples, would you now have more apples? No, you’d have fewer apples -- fewer than that other guy who has an unfair number of apples!

Just when you thought the author could not possibly make any less sense...this comes out of his/her keyboard. My math says that "you" is now one point five times as wealthy as before...has one and a half as much to eat...or to trade for other goods or services...or to invest in some way. It makes no difference to "you's" level of personal affluence that Rich has 80 apples - and why is 80 apples an "unfair" balance anyway? Maybe the guy owns an apple orchard...

See, the wealthiest 1 percent prevent us from getting ahead because any time we improve our incomes, we spend more on businesses and services, and guess who that helps? The 1 percent. Getting ahead just isn’t worth the knowledge that the rich are getting richer.

Well...the idea is that we are getting worthwhile products or services in return, which improve our quality of life too...or, one assumes we wouldn't purchase. Whoever wrote this sounds like they are sad-sacked to the max !

There’s no point in working hard to try to become one of the 1 percent ourselves, because what’s the chance of that happening? One in 100? Who would play a lottery with odds that bad?

No, instead of working hard, the 99 percent can only sit and protest on Wall Street until the wealthiest 1 percent are torn down.

First these odds are actually not all that bad. Second "sitting" on Wall Street will not...repeat not result in a tear down of the so-called 1%.

Somebody was having a really depressing day when they wrote this...cheer up! You can do it!

I think that's satire...isn't it? If it ain't, I don't know what I just read?

Get rid of that 1% is all the funding for every single social program dries up and then they are gonna go"oh crap guess we shouldna done that".

People are not even thinking these days OWS the pure mass manipulation of disinformation for a means to an end.

Government owned Government Rules Slavery where a small elite calling all the shots and making all the cash and reaping the most benefits.

So how is OWS any different from what we got now?

Answer: No different but a whole lot worse.

reply to post by spacekc929


Why should we work with the planet or mother nature? She is always doing stuff to try to kill us. Earthquakes, tornados, lightning, tsunamis, etc.... We should mine everything and give it out to everyone. Mother nature is the ultimate 1 percenter and she is trying to kill us.