• 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!

Is America becoming a plutocracy?

Is America becoming a plutocracy?


  • Total voters
    31
I tentatively said always was, becomming more so. But the thing is it has see-sawed. We're probably the closest since the robber barons of the industrial and guilded ages.
 
I agree that this is a valid point. Wealthy people are successful, so one can normally assume that they're good at getting things done. But is that the case here? Take Betsy DeVos, most of her wealth derives from the fact she's the daughter-in-law of Richard DeVos, the founder of Amway. So is the fact that she's wealthy an indicator that she may know a thing or two?
True. But Devos was likely picked for her strong republican ties and credentials (establishment?), and her non profit work with education reform, MI charters, etc. She's pushed for school choice (possibly for religious reasons sadly), and if Trump wants to reform schools, she may be a good pick.
Another unfortunate reality is that this election, Trump was elected, and he may feel most comfortable with his own peer group. Trump also likes to primariliy associate with "winners", and he sees that largely as economic winners. A lot of this seems to me just like personal preference type stuff.

Ultimately he is just one branch of government, we have congress and we have the courts, so I am not worried about a 4 year stint from the billionaires club to much. I think there is a lot more to fear with Trumps unpredictability, personally. But its certainly different isn't it?

As to "why still heads of companies", I can only say from experience, I left my company to "pursue other life dreams", and I miss it far more than I thought I would. there are a lot of emotions tied up with pursuing ones lifes work, in a place where you have influence and a history. Losing that can be difficult. If I were that wealthy, I would certainly be involved in a number of businesses/organizations, they absolutely stay in touch to a large degree, when they do this.
 
I agree that this is a valid point. Wealthy people are successful, so one can normally assume that they're good at getting things done. But is that the case here? Take Betsy DeVos, most of her wealth derives from the fact she's the daughter-in-law of Richard DeVos, the founder of Amway. So is the fact that she's wealthy an indicator that she may know a thing or two?

As for 'style points' - again, could be a fair point but it definitely depends on the character of the person in question. If these people weren't in it for the money any more, why are they still heads of their companies?

This was a function of this political need to have rainbows more than anything else. Had Trump been able to pick the best person for each job she would not have been there, but he needed to add a woman. He also needs someone who understands that the American education system long ago failed, and that decades of multiple reforms have also all failed, so we need a bigger better tool. Betsy DeVos fills the bill, her wealth whatever it is had litle/nothing to do with it. Sadly there are bigger and higher priory problems, and it is more important to have the best people in the more important jobs, things like education which while are important will not be tackled anytime soon got slotted for rainbow building.

It happens, Trump had to do it.

Affirmative action lives.

sadly.
 
Last edited:
I voted "Other." We must remember, at the founding of this nation only wealthy white landowners could vote. Obviously, that has changed for the better. However, we have become more of an oligarchy in recent decades. I guess the answer to the question depends on what time periods we are comparing.
 
Something like that.

Republicans and neoliberal Democrats have helped usher that into being.
 
So you're an anti-vaxxer too, huh?

That stuff bothers me about Trump, almost as much as his propensity to not honor contracts.

Look, I am not here to blow smoke up your ass, Trump is very flawed, and is high risk.

I pray nightly that the elite soon get their heads out of their asses.

It never should have gotten to this point, to President Trump.

But who in the elite is willing to take responsibility??

Even now, even Post Trump???

Morality, it maters.

Smarts too.

:prof
 
Last edited:
Trump is appointing reformers, not THEM.

Them are the ones who put themselves first at the expense of America, Team Trump are the ones who want to try to put AMERICA FIRST! for a change, and yes it does include people who have done wrong in the past but who want to make it right.

Trump puts Trump first. That is what narcissists do.

If Trump put America first then his products would be made in the USA.

Trump is a snake oil salesman. The sooner you realize this, the better.
 
Trump puts Trump first. That is what narcissists do.

If Trump put America first then his products would be made in the USA.

Trump is a snake oil salesman. The sooner you realize this, the better.

The problem with that argument is that if you are right, if this is what rises to the top in the American System... designed and run by the elite.... then the elite are even worse than I claim that they are, which is pretty ****ing bad.

Are you sure you want to go there?
 
Last edited:
Why is it that we cannot fix the mess without the wealthy? Because they control too much power?

How exactly does bringing in more wealthy people solve that problem?

I'm really interested in hearing what the right leaning libertarians, constitutionalists, and Trump voters have to say about this in general. Surely we can all agree that too much money in politics is a bipartisan issues?

Wealth is a measure of success. These are people who are very successful. Why in the world would we want to put people who are not successful and knowledgeable into positions of political power and influence? Why would you want losers in charge?
 
Wealth is a measure of success. These are people who are very successful. Why in the world would we want to put people who are not successful and knowledgeable into positions of political power and influence? Why would you want losers in charge?

Trump and a ton of other elite will now and have always said that wealth is the measure of success in this game.

Way too many Americans today are found pretending that they dont know this.

Course if they really dont know then we are truly ****ed.

Cause people are dumber than I thought.

Which is pretty ****ing dumb.
 
Trump and a ton of other will now and have always said that wealth is the measure of success in this game.

Way too many Americans today are found pretending that they dont know this.

Course if they really done know then we are truly ****ed.

Cause people are dumber than I thought.

Which is pretty ****ing dumb.

The wealthy ought to be in charge because it was a central tenet of Trump's campaign that he make American great again, including financially great. Who better to put in charge of that than people who have already proven that they can make themselves and their companies financially great?

But liberals aren't that bright.
 
The wealthy ought to be in charge because it was a central tenet of Trump's campaign that he make American great again, including financially great. Who better to put in charge of that than people who have already proven that they can make themselves and their companies financially great?

But liberals aren't that bright.

The lack of honesty is the bigger problem.

Intelligence can be fixed.
 
Because of the exponential growth in cabinet wealth when Trump takes over. It's going to grow by 30x.

It's obvious that the people surrounding the president are likely to be richer than your average citizen, but under Bush and Obama they were just that, richer than your average citizen. Some cabinet picks were still paying off their student loans.

Now all of a sudden, we seem to have entered an age where the people in charge are absurdly rich. In the many billions of dollars, unfathomable amounts, more than the GDP's of many countries.

There are only 500 billionaires in the USA, and Trump seems to have picked 1 in 50 of them for positions where they are meant to be representing your average American person or family.

Which cabinet appointees were still paying off their student loans?
 
It's always been that way. Originally only landowning white men could vote and the 6th president was the son of a former. The electoral college, political primaries, and superdelegates ensure this will continue until voters wise up and go for a 3rd party who isn't in bed with billionaires and dictators

Is it marginally worse lately? Maybe. We've had 2 Bush, 2 Clintons and now a billionaire real estate tycoon who inherited his wealth and did photo ops with the Clintons. Arguably Obama didn't fit into these political dynasties, at least until he joined them
 
Trumps 16 cabinet level picks have more money than a third of American households combined.

My belief



plu·toc·ra·cy
plo͞oˈtäkrəsē/Submit
noun
government by the wealthy.
a country or society governed by the wealthy.
plural noun: plutocracies
an elite or ruling class of people whose power derives from their wealth.

Now, in my opinion this isn't entirely down to Trump but his election is exacerbating the problem. The USA has been a plutocracy for quite a while (see below video) but it's becoming ever more apparent that it is the interests of the wealthy that are going to be represented in government, rather than the will of the people. For what it's worth, Obama's cabinet was worth ~300 million, most of it (200m belonging to John Kerry). Source: https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/overview.php?type=W&filter=E&sort=D&ptysort=A&year=2012

Do you think this is the case? Can it be prevented? Should it be prevented? Or is it a good thing we have uber successful businessmen and women helming our country? Do these people care about your average American citizen?



I believe that the USA has been a plutocracy from the beginning. Facts are that some people were owned by our framers and considered profitable property at the time. These framers, some who never owned other people also considered people without land property unworthy of democracy. Both of these facts are riddled throughout the beginning of US history and rippled their way through to our present social behavior and federal governance. I believe these facts to be evidence of plutocracy in our government.
Our federal governments foundation is based on the ideal that people are created equal. I believe the USA is prosperous because we the people have faith in that ideology. Sadly, the framers of our government founded this country on the principle that all "men" were created equal, among other conditions that will create an unfair advantage to those with wealth. It has been an uphill moral, legal, and sometimes physical battle ever since.
At least our founders helped spread the idea that people are created equal. Too bad they didn't practice that ideal when they legislated.
 
Unfortunately, the wealthy are powerful by their very nature. It's simply the way the world works. We can only hope they see us in themselves and realize our destinies are intertwined.
 
Last edited:
Wealth is a measure of success. These are people who are very successful. Why in the world would we want to put people who are not successful and knowledgeable into positions of political power and influence? Why would you want losers in charge?

1. Is wealth the best measure of success? I'd contend it isn't.
2. Is wealth a measure of success when it hasn't been earned, but inherited?
3. Is success the best indicator to go by to put people in govt positions when that wealth is often made by looking after themselves and not the people around them?
4. Does not amassing wealth make you a loser? What about people who dedicate their life to charity work instead of making wealth. Are they losers?
 
The lack of honesty is the bigger problem.

Intelligence can be fixed.

No politicians are honest. You can tell they're lying because their mouths are moving.
 
Back
Top Bottom