• 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

Middleground said:
Money is power. Money corrupts. You put the dots together.
Click to expand...

A rich person might have a Picasso hanging on the wall at whatever million dollars he paid for it and I have a print of a fox hunt I bought at an estate sale for $40.00. We both have something to look at when we are taking a dump. Dots connected.
 
Middleground said:
View attachment 67179146
67179146-1-own-more-than-99-2016-report-says-republican-tax-cuts-have-significantly-increased-wealth-gap.jpg
Click to expand...



Well you know what then? Get rich!! Don't snivel about other people getting rich, you get rich yourself.

There will always be poor, middle and rich. That's real life. Crying about it is just pathetic.

If I am happy and I like my home and my job, why the hell should I care if Bill Gates is a billionaire? That's just Commie thinking. Bill Gates can be a trillionaire for all I care. As long as I like my life I won't envy others theirs.

Grow up for Pete's sake. Live your life and stop sweating other peoples' lives.
 
ocean515 said:
So it would seem the Progressive Machine has got some soldiers pushing press releases.

Is the expectation people won't realize these studies are funded by the likes of George Soros' Open Society Institute, and thus have an extreme bias and agenda attached to them, or are they purely for the consumption of the Progressive Believers, and are talking points to fuel the propaganda effort?
Click to expand...

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....
 
I do not understand how anyone thinks that this kind of stagnant, concentrated wealth is sustainable. What exactly will all these piggies do when the rest of us are too poor to maintain an economy?
 
Sietske22 said:
I personally don't care about the dynamics of wealthy distribution, as long as all citizens get their basic needs taken care of.

If it wasn't for our hyper-consumerist, greedy, hyper-materialistic society, folks would be much more content with what they had and wouldn't give a **** what rich people possess.
Click to expand...

Then maybe we should have a fairly large tax exempt amount of income, and an exceptionally steep income tax on all income over that, so that no one would be so "hyper-consumerist, greedy, hyper-materialistic".

In all honestly, I don't think that the masses really care how rich the rich are, all they care about is themselves. And I really don't understand why anyone who believes that the masses are overly greedy and or materialistic, wouldn't also feel the same about the rich. Maybe we should all just be poor.
 
Middleground said:
Right. Perfect example is between 1962 and 1983. How do you explain the doubling since 1983?
Click to expand...

Who cares! Sheese!!

I say it again:

Get rich!! Don't snivel about other people getting rich, you get rich yourself.

There will always be poor, middle and rich. That's real life. Crying about it is just pathetic.

If I am happy and I like my home and my job, why the hell should I care if Bill Gates is a billionaire? That's just Commie thinking. Bill Gates can be a trillionaire for all I care. As long as I like my life I won't envy others theirs.

Grow up for Pete's sake. Live your life and stop sweating other peoples' lives.
 
UtahBill said:
Divide it all up and give everybody an equal share.....
In 2 or 3 generations, the situation will be as tho it never happened.
Click to expand...

That's absolutely true that the distribution scheme would be roughly the same, but it's not likely that it would be the exact same people who are rich or poor.

Anyhow, that's the reason why we shouldn't have sudden massive redistribution. Redistribution should be done at about the same rate that income and wealth pool, annually (or monthly or weekly). In other words, our current system seems to be working fairly well, just needs some fine tuning.
 
TerryOfromCA said:
Well you know what then? Get rich!! Don't snivel about other people getting rich, you get rich yourself.

There will always be poor, middle and rich. That's real life. Crying about it is just pathetic.

If I am happy and I like my home and my job, why the hell should I care if Bill Gates is a billionaire? That's just Commie thinking. Bill Gates can be a trillionaire for all I care. As long as I like my life I won't envy others theirs.

Grow up for Pete's sake. Live your life and stop sweating other peoples' lives.
Click to expand...

Your level of understanding on this particular subject is frighteningly non existent.

First, start by wiping your brain for the notion that the lower class are just jealous. That should free up your mind on why huge income inequality is such a bad thing.
 
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...

yea because we all know that the economy is a zero sum game.
the fact is that this is not monopoly and this market is more fluid.

money constantly changes hands up and down the pay scale.
so it is not possible for this to happen.

more so when the fed controls the money supply.
when will people drop this absurd theory.
 
Middleground said:
Your level of understanding on this particular subject is frighteningly non existent.

First, start by wiping your brain for the notion that the lower class are just jealous. That should free up your mind on why huge income inequality is such a bad thing.
Click to expand...

if they weren't jealous then they would stop trying to take what doesn't belong to them. that is just a start.
they wouldn't lead with the "it's not fair" meme that so often is the main point in their argument.

if being rich was easy then everyone would do it.
getting to be rich isn't easy and is in fact hard. it takes a lot of discipline and money management to get to be rich.
something most people don't have.
 
ludin said:
if they weren't jealous then they would stop trying to take what doesn't belong to them. that is just a start.
they wouldn't lead with the "it's not fair" meme that so often is the main point in their argument.

if being rich was easy then everyone would do it.
getting to be rich isn't easy and is in fact hard. it takes a lot of discipline and money management to get to be rich.
something most people don't have.
Click to expand...

It would seem they have nothing in crybaby points about "fairness"
As do the flat/fair tax crowds
 
Jack Hays said:
Of course poverty has costs. What does that have to do with this thread?
Click to expand...

I asked a question - received a non answer- So I asked again- That is what it has to do with this thread.
 
SlevinKelevra said:
It would seem they have nothing in crybaby points about "fairness"
As do the flat/fair tax crowds
Click to expand...

typical non-argument from you that addresses nothing.
 
JANFU said:
I asked a question - received a non answer- So I asked again- That is what it has to do with this thread.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but if you want to pursue this tangent you'll need to explain why.
 
Sietske22 said:
I personally don't care about the dynamics of wealthy distribution, as long as all citizens get their basic needs taken care of.

If it wasn't for our hyper-consumerist, greedy, hyper-materialistic society, folks would be much more content with what they had and wouldn't give a **** what rich people possess.
Click to expand...

I would say that we have the wealth to easily provide the necessities of life to everyone. We should at least do that, and if people want more material things, then let them work for it.
 
Jack Hays said:
I'm sorry, but if you want to pursue this tangent you'll need to explain why.
Click to expand...

Nah, there is another thread on this.
Social & financial costs incurred can cost much more than the cure.
 
ludin said:
if they weren't jealous then they would stop trying to take what doesn't belong to them. that is just a start.
they wouldn't lead with the "it's not fair" meme that so often is the main point in their argument.

if being rich was easy then everyone would do it.
getting to be rich isn't easy and is in fact hard. it takes a lot of discipline and money management to get to be rich.
something most people don't have.
Click to expand...

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?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom