Plutocracy Reborn

[mbig]

Occam has posted a consistent string with this one:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...rms/104461-wealth-redistribution-reality.html

 

[Risky Thicket]

winners win and society wins when lots of people strive to be winners. Democratic party policies have turned lots of people into dependent teat sucklers and that is not helping build the middle class.

The libs never answer this easy question

what would be happening if the RICH ARE NO LONGER GETTING RICHER?

and by that I mean those who invest wisely?

The rich would not have gotten richer without socialism. Fact.

Invested wisely? In your world who is it that might not invest wisely? Have you considered that some people do not want to invest? Yet you would force them to or tell them to **** off. What of the people who did invest as wisely as they knew how and were scammed to hell and back by Wall Street and thus no longer have anything to invest? Who got richer there? Joe and Jane Sixpack? Bull****!

You are an attorney. Why aren't you working to get the trillions back to the Americans who - without a choice - lent the money to banks? Let me guess, if there is a windfall to make on representing middle class people lawyers will be on it in a heartbeat, right? Other than that, **** those people anyway, right?

 

[TurtleDude]

The rich would not have gotten richer without socialism. Fact.

Invested wisely? In your world who is it that might not invest wisely? Have you considered that some people do not want to invest? Yet you would force them to or tell them to **** off. What of the people who did invest as wisely as they knew how and were scammed to hell and back by Wall Street and thus no longer have anything to invest? Who got richer there? Joe and Jane Sixpack? Bull****!

What is true is that the uber rich love welfare socialism. It allows them to maintain their primacy

 

[haymarket]

What is true is that the uber rich love welfare socialism. It allows them to maintain their primacy

and the evidence of this claim?????

 

[imagep]

The rich would not have gotten richer without socialism. Fact.

Invested wisely? In your world who is it that might not invest wisely? Have you considered that some people do not want to invest? Yet you would force them to or tell them to **** off. What of the people who did invest as wisely as they knew how and were scammed to hell and back by Wall Street and thus no longer have anything to invest? Who got richer there? Joe and Jane Sixpack? Bull****!

You are an attorney. Why aren't you working to get the trillions back to the Americans who - without a choice - lent the money to banks? Let me guess, if there is a windfall to make on representing middle class people lawyers will be on it in a heartbeat, right? Other than that, **** those people anyway, right?

Actually, I believe that it is the nature of capitalism that the rich get richer. Money always tends to pool, and with time that pool becomes larger and larger in the absence of a mechanism which redistributes it.

It's much like water on earth. If the process of evaportation stopped, most all water would migrate to the oceans and the land masses would become barren and lifeless.

Taxation is our economic version of evaporation. Without taxation, our economy will become barren and lifeless.

 

[mbig]

Actually, I believe that it is the nature of capitalism that the rich get richer. Money always tends to pool, and with time that pool becomes larger and larger in the absence of a mechanism which redistributes it.

It's much like water on earth. If the process of evaportation stopped, most all water would migrate to the oceans and the land masses would become barren and lifeless.

Taxation is our economic version of evaporation. Without taxation, our economy will become barren and lifeless.

Unless we institute, or rather 'return,' to the more progressive rates we had in most of the last century, wealth polarity/inequality will continue to grow and the recession/depression will continue.
The 'bottom'/under-class keeps getting larger.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/90108-truth-can-afford-pay-taxes.html

 

[What if...?]

I've never really believed in "experts".

Assuming that the definition of an expert is someone who knows a vast amount about a particular subject, then how is it possible that so many experts disagree so much about the same topic? I would presume that if they were really experts, they would all pretty much have the same knowlege about the topic, and thus would pretty much come to the same conclusions. So if they come to different conclusions, then they must posess different sets of knowlege, without a lot of overlap in those sets thus they are not actually as knowledgble as they would like us "non-experts" to believe.

Of course I'm not an expert of this subject, so what would I know.

I often wonder if Economics is any more predictively accurate than say Astrology. Seems like psychology is a more "accurate" science.

 

[mpg]

You can't lift people up by dragging others down.

 

[What if...?]

You can't lift people up by dragging others down.

You can remove feet from throats, however.

Oppression CAN be economic, after all.

 

[mpg]

You can remove feet from throats, however.

Oppression CAN be economic, after all.

The federal income tax rate for the working poor was reduced to 0%. What foot are you referring to?

 

[imagep]

I often wonder if Economics is any more predictively accurate than say Astrology. Seems like psychology is a more "accurate" science.

I took psycology in high school and sociology in college. Psychology is total malarky. It's impossible to ever know what's runing through an individual'ss mind, unless they tell ya, and even then, they are probably lying. Sociology is much more relyable. While we can't predict the behavor of an individual, we can most definately predict the behavor of a homogenious group of people. Not every black person likes watermellon, but it's fairly safe to suggest that as a population, black people tend to be better at basketball than white people.

Macroeconomics is equivilent to sociolgy.

Microecomics is equivilent to psycology.

Not that any of that has anything to do with your post, but I just always wanted the opportunity to give that lecture to someone.

 

[imagep]

You can't lift people up by dragging others down.

Tell that to a pile of crabs in a pot of boiling water!

 

[imagep]

The federal income tax rate for the working poor was reduced to 0%. What foot are you referring to?

The foot of the small paycheck.

 

[What if...?]

That's the throat. Where's the foot?

At the end of the Landlords leg?

 

[Mach]

Have you considered that some people do not want to invest?

Yes?
Have you considered not only do some people not want to make money via investment, that some also don't want to save?
Or work?
Or get a degree?
Or work hard?
Or work smart?
Or raise their children well?
Or pay taxes?

Is there a point to your position other than pointing out that some people don't like to do some things? Let me get this right, that because some people can't be bothered to invest, the people who DO invest and make a profit, should therefore give money to the people that couldn't be bothered to invest. Brilliant.

What of the people who did invest as wisely as they knew how and were scammed to hell and back by Wall Street and thus no longer have anything to invest?

BS.
The #1 financial advice given to anyone who does even the smallest amount of investigation into investing is: to diversify.
If they were "scammed" by Wall Street, they were not diversified. Enron, Madoff, real criminal activity, was a result of the OPPOSITE of diversification.

 

[mbig]

ty donc

 

[iliveonramen]

It seems any attempt to return to historical Norms is "Class warfare"... when in Fact "There has been class warfare, and my side is winning" - Warren Buffett.

Conservatives have stated they want to take us back in time. Most assume that means the 50-70's but they mean late 19th Century earlier 20th.

 

[mbig]

FEBRUARY 10, 2012
Living Very Large
Shooting ranges, an indoor tennis court, a bedroom bigger than many houses: For a small cadre of very wealthy owners, building big is back. A bird's-eye view of some of the mega mansions going up across the country.

Living - WSJ.com

The latest project of Hyatt hotel heir Anthony Pritzker is a 49,300-square-foot building designed by an architecture firm in Paris. It involves a small army of specialized consultants and boasts amenities like a bowling alley, hairdressing area and gym.

The project, in the hills above Los Angeles, isn't a luxury hotel—it's a private home for Mr. Pritzker and his family.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203889904577201043455977600.html?mod=WSJ_PersonalFinance_RealEstate#project%3DSLIDESHOW08%26s%3DSB10001424052970203824904577213634206073476%26articleTabs%3Dslideshow

Near where Mr. Pritzker's home is under construction, neighbors are up in arms over another of Mr. McCoy's projects, a roughly 70,000-square-foot compound (downsized from 85,000 square feet) awaiting permitting for Prince Abdulaziz ibn Abdullah ibn Abdulaziz Al Saud, son of the king of Saudi Arabia. The compound is on three lots and would include a main home of 42,000 square feet—part of it underground—a guest house, pool cabana, gate house and another residence of up to 20,000 square feet"..."

Four years into the housing downturn, what little new-home construction remains is focused on downsized living. According to the Census Bureau, the average size of a newly completed single-family home peaked in 2007 at 2,521 square feet, capping nearly three decades of growth, falling to 2,392 square feet in 2010.
Then there are the exceptions....

Hedge-fund manager Cliff Asness is building a 25,900-square-foot, Colonial-style home with an indoor swimming pool and tennis court in Greenwich, Conn., according to permits and other town records.

Nearby, a 31,500-square-foot mansion is being built for Lee Weinstein, founder of data-center concern Xand, with 15 bathrooms (plus additional powder rooms), a 2,500-square-foot master suite and a basement with a theater, wine cellar, juice bar, dance studio and sauna, records show.

Twenty miles away, in Westport, Conn., Melissa and Doug Bernstein, whose Melissa & Doug company makes educational children's toys, are creating a compound of more than 30,000 square feet with a stand-alone ice-cream parlor, plans show. The main house alone is 29,500 square feet and includes a gym partially covered by glass; there's also a guest cottage, pool cabana and rec-room-and-garage building. The property also has a pool, tennis court and playground. The town deemed the home complete last summer; the tax assessor in 2010 valued the property at $19.8 million.

In Silicon Valley, Jim Ellis, who co-founded a cellphone insurance provider, and his wife, Jenna, are building a 25,000-square-foot home on a single story. Plans show the home, which at 430 feet in length is longer than a football field, is expected to have multiple garages, including a showroom garage joined to a family room by a glass wall, allowing viewing of the car collection from inside the home.

In Incline Village, Nev., software mogul Larry Ellison's 18,000-square-foot-plus compound under construction will have competition from a neighbor's house down the street.

Plans show a more than 50,000-square-foot lakefront home, including spaces such as decks; inside the home, plans show a half-basketball court, trampoline, climbing wall and indoor tennis court with a viewing area. The owner is Gene Pretti, who heads an investment-management firm. The owners of the homes identified in this story, some of whom own their property through limited-liability companies, declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment."...

 

[oldreliable67]

What of the people who did invest as wisely as they knew how and were scammed to hell and back by Wall Street and thus no longer have anything to invest? Who got richer there? Joe and Jane Sixpack? Bull****!

Actually, I believe that it is the nature of capitalism that the rich get richer. Money always tends to pool, and with time that pool becomes larger and larger in the absence of a mechanism which redistributes it.

Hey, maybe Wall St is that re-distribution method!

Over the long run, investing in equities has provided a superior rate of return to investors. Yes, of course, there have been ups and downs, and if you were forced to liquidate during one of those 'down' periods, your rate of return suffered. But remember, we're talking long-term investment, not trading or speculation.

Traders and speculators are subject to the same fads, foibles, fear, greed, and fashions as are other people. They succumb to the siren song of those who promise impossible results with a minimum of pain, just like homeowners do to driveway sealers, roofing bargains, and Nigerian finance ministers. Wall St and these other 'scam artists' alike most often eventually find themselves incarcerated.

 

[oldreliable67]

FEBRUARY 10, 2012
Living Very Large
Shooting ranges, an indoor tennis court, a bedroom bigger than many houses: For a small cadre of very wealthy owners, building big is back. A bird's-eye view of some of the mega mansions going up across the country.

What is your point?

 

[oldreliable67]

ty donc

Looks like a sign of success to me.

 

[imagep]

Looks like a sign of success to me.

You mean Mexico and Venezuela are more succesful than Japan, Germany, France, Italy and Canada?

I don't see any correlation and certainly not any causation.