• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

SlevinKelevra said:
what do you think the first few societies were?
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less. we have had wealthy individuals somewhere in the world for at least three thousand years.
 
Conservative said:
Why don't you ask the 17 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers if they are better off under Obama.
Click to expand...

Or you could ask the 298 million who are either employed or don't want to work. Those people would probably be much easier to find.

Maybe you can ask the over 10% African American unemployed why Obama hasn't created an economy that helps them.
Click to expand...

It would probably be much easier to ask the 90% who aren't unemployed.
 
imagep said:
Or you could ask the 298 million who are either employed or don't want to work. Those people would probably be much easier to find.



It would probably be much easier to ask the 90% who aren't unemployed.
Click to expand...

Yep, we saw how happy those people are in the last election. Those that continue to support liberalism are making Gruber look brilliant. Only a true idiot continues to buy the liberal lies.

By the way we have a labor force of 157 million and child labor laws that prevent that number from rising to 298 million
 
Conservative said:
Yep, we saw how happy those people are in the last election. Those that continue to support liberalism are making Gruber look brilliant. Only a true idiot continues to buy the liberal lies.
Click to expand...

Didn't a democrat win the last two presidential elections?
 
SlevinKelevra said:
3000 years = "always" nice backpedal
Click to expand...

this is a silly trick-focus on minutia and claim that this overcomes an argument you cannot beat

take all the people who have existed in known history

how many of them have lived in societies with disparities of wealth versus those who have lived in completely egalitarian societies?

percentages-probably 98% to 2%
 
TurtleDude said:
this is a silly trick-focus on minutia and claim that this overcomes an argument you cannot beat

take all the people who have existed in known history

how many of them have lived in societies with disparities of wealth versus those who have lived in completely egalitarian societies?

percentages-probably 98% to 2%
Click to expand...

white flag detected.
again.


look here. if you use the word "always" mean it.
 
imagep said:
Didn't a democrat win the last two presidential elections?
Click to expand...

Yes, he did losing 4 million votes in 2012, losing the House in 2010 and the entire Congress in 2014. Are you ever going to get tired of carrying his water for him and making Gruber look smart?
 
Middleground said:
You. Do, Not. Get. It.

With an ever so dwindling pool of available money to be made, how would the bottom 99% increase their median income?
Click to expand...

:roll:

this is only true if the the economy is a zero sum came. since it sin't a zero sum game then this line of logic is invalid.
 
imagep said:
Hmm, so the rich are lefities. Interesting. I learn something from you most every time you post.
Click to expand...

Yes. Liberals account for the majority of the 1% followed by libertarians and then conservatives.
 
TerryOfromCA said:
But thats what Leftsists want, an all powerful government. They are Socialists, just like their Great Leader the Kenyan
Click to expand...

All the right wants is a conglomeration of government being controlled by corporate America with a little thrown in to fool the religious zealots, which is never hard to do.
 
gdgyva said:
i have 145 employees

i just gave raises to 133 of them

most employers are giving raises....just not big ones

unless the particular employee has made himself/herself more valuable to the company

i gave 2 employees approx 35% raises....my top two performers of the year

i gave about ten 5-7% raises.....they did better than other employees in the last year...top performers

i gave most of the rest 2-3% raises based on cost of living increases

and i gave zero raise to 12 employees (either too new, or bad reviews/bad performance)
Click to expand...

Good for you. You win a cookie!

You being an example of how things should be done is just that, one example. In my opinion most large corporations don't work like you describe. I've worked for some pretty large companies, along with some smaller ones, and getting anything out of them is like snail racing, slow and slimy.
 
Texmex said:
Good for you. You win a cookie!

You being an example of how things should be done is just that, one example. In my opinion most large corporations don't work like you describe. I've worked for some pretty large companies, along with some smaller ones, and getting anything out of them is like snail racing, slow and slimy.
Click to expand...



While I applaud the effort, I have to fundamentally disagree in 2 areas


1) a COLA is not a raise
2) employees with bad reviews/etc should be fired and replaced, not kept at same income.
 
SlevinKelevra said:
While I applaud the effort, I have to fundamentally disagree in 2 areas


1) a COLA is not a raise
2) employees with bad reviews/etc should be fired and replaced, not kept at same income.
Click to expand...

At a lot of places I worked we didn't get COLA raises.

Whether or not to fire someone should depend on more than a bad review. Circumstances could account for a temporary decline in productivity.
 
Texmex said:
At a lot of places I worked we didn't get COLA raises.

Whether or not to fire someone should depend on more than a bad review. Circumstances could account for a temporary decline in productivity.
Click to expand...


wrt #1

assuming we mean COLA, this is an inflationary canceling increase;
presumably the employer has adjusted prices accordingly; as such the worker's pay is not a higher % relative to their productivity, hence it shouldn't be viewed as a raise as the worker is still
valued proportionally at the same level; the fact employers DON'T do this doesn't change it's actual context.

wrt 2, I would think mitigating circumstances would be in the review accordingly. I was simply meaning. Bad bad because bad.
 
imagep said:
The economy isn't a zero sum game, but distribution from a pool (regardless if the size of the pool can change), as stated as a percentage of the pool, is zero sum.
Click to expand...

not if the pool can change to meet the demand of the economy which is what the federal reserve does.
now if we were still on the gold standard then I would say yes it would be a major issue.

however we are not.
 
Middleground said:
Money is power. Money corrupts. You put the dots together.
Click to expand...
Ok. Here are the dots. Its not freedom you want but a free ride. If power is what you fear, you would not put ever more power into the hands of the state.
 
I dont see what the big deal is. The one constant about history is that there has always been a 1% regardless of the type of economy it is- even in communist/socialist economies there are the 1% who hold all the power and money, that is the one constant that will never change.
 
polgara said:
Greetings, ocean515. :2wave:

So Soros is in the news again, causing trouble as usual. What else is new? :yawn: Has the man ever done one good thing in his life that anyone knows about? While I understand why a billionaire like Soros would spend $33 million dollars to agitate low income people on wealth inequality - it does cause envy, anger, and riots by those people who don't know what his goal is or how much money he personally has - he is 84 years old and maybe he feels it's just taking too long to get it done, so he's decided to step things up a bit? Whatever. If they're counting on him to improve their lives, though....
Click to expand...

George Soros, IMO, is a warped, twisted, evil man. Hiding his global agenda behind his front organization, the "Open Society Institute", he seeks to manipulate and indoctrinate for financial gain. Try this. When you see a link to some particularly left agenda driven group or organization, type in the organizations name and add Open Society Institute. More often than not, his organization, or perhaps, the Democracy Alliance, shows up as a benefactor or partner in the effort. It's rather stunning. Once reporting laws changed, his investment hedge fund, Soros Fund Management, went dark, chosing to go private to avoid major disclosure of his activities. Prior to do so, you could view his positions, which gave an inside view of his efforts. How about petroleum futures? Big positions impacting global prices for oil. A really bad guy right out of the comic books.
 
JANFU said:
What do you think? The middle class is disappearing. At one time increases in productivity equated to wage increases.
https://fortune.com/2015/01/19/the-1-will-own-more-than-the-99-by-2016-report-says/
The richest 1% of the population will own more than half of the world’s wealth by next year as inequality continues its relentless rise across the globe, a new report out Monday says.

The report, by the U.K.-based charity Oxfam, shows that the top 1% have grown their share of global wealth constantly since 2010. After dipping at 44% in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, it rose to 48% by the end of last year and is poised to top 50% by the end of next year.
Click to expand...

Why does this matter? Why does the left always imply that "the wealth" is some kind of static pie that never grows, just falls more and more into the hands of the eeeeevil rich? :roll:

If socialism is sooooo great, why is this still happening? Decades upon decades of socialism in Europe, and the USA becoming more and more "progressive" all the time? What gives?
 
Fearandloathing said:
I got tired of this propaganda about 25 years ago. It was bogus then, it is more bogus now.

In fact, this has been the mantra of Communists, socialists, social democrats and the entire left side of the spectrum since the first lazy bastard decided he shouldn't have to work.

What they don't tell you is the numbers are skewed all over the place, there is no agreed on definition of what constitutes "poor" and they usually compare wealth with income, ignore the fact the mysterious 1% pay 90% of the tax burden, and that today's poor have 50" screens.

Look, one way this number almost goes away is a simple thing. Stop the flow of 1,300 a day or so of "poor" illegals from flooding the low end of the job pool. Incomes for the lowest end will rise as will wages.
Click to expand...

At the core, is a global social justice agenda that "mysteriously" also forms the basis for many other global efforts, including the AGW agenda. Is there any wonder why the pushers behind "immigration" and these myriad of other issues are all the same groups and people?

Frankly, while it's alarming, it's also impressive. People have lost sight of what billions can do to manipulate and control others. I don't see it as a conspiracy, it's a very well funded, very sophisticated, global political/social effort. Rather amazing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom