US views of Capitalism v Socialism

#27
#27
joevol24 said:
Too bad the average centralist will never get any air time to voice their opinions. America only wants to hear about stout opposition, not the reality of what works. But hey, one day we may actually get death race!!! If Obama keeps going the way he is, the entire country will be in such a freefall I am afraid we will never recover from it.
Click to expand...


I tend to believe that the reason capitalism isn't emphasized in the media is simply because most of the media has an extremely limited knowledge, if any, on economics (most tend to have english, journalism, or history backgrounds).

It isn't that they are trying to keep from voicing the truth. Rather, it is that they have never been taught the values of capitalism. Because they don’t understand its values, as much of it is counterintuitive, the media is vehemently opposed to voicing the benefits of capitalism.
 
#28
#28
paul1454 said:
I tend to believe that the reason capitalism isn't emphasized in the media is simply because most of the media has an extremely limited knowledge, if any, on economics (most tend to have english, journalism, or history backgrounds).

It isn't that they are trying to keep from voicing the truth. Rather, it is that they have never been taught the values of capitalism. Because they don’t understand its values, as much of it is counterintuitive, the media is vehemently opposed to voicing the benefits of capitalism.
Click to expand...

IMO the media is only concerned with voicing the ideas of whomever the current second coming is, i.e. Clinton in the nineties and Obama now.
 
#29
#29
the average media member doesn't know squat about economics. stewart showed that rather clearly during his much praised slamming of cramer.
 
#32
#32
income.jpg
 
#34
#34
droski said:
and I care about this why exactly?
Click to expand...

that's what I was wondering, as with the case of rjd's pretty, but nearly illegible graph above.

income is dynamic and the left, unfortunately, always want to paint the picture of one man getting poorer because one rich man is taking everything from him.
 
#35
#35
droski said:
and I care about this why exactly?
Click to expand...

Well, the original question was what income bracket, and you just said middle class. Middle class has changed. In fact, Lower, Upper, and Middle class has changed. As a percentage of aggregate income, they are earning less and less every year. The top 5% was pretty steady until 1980 and have since started earning more.

No agenda here, just showing demographics. I personally don't care how much the top 5% earn, they pay most the taxes, but they have done significantly better than every other income bracket, especially since 1980.
 
#36
#36
MG1968 said:
that's what I was wondering, as with the case of rjd's pretty, but nearly illegible graph above.

income is dynamic and the left, unfortunately, always want to paint the picture of one man getting poorer because one rich man is taking everything from him.
Click to expand...

Yes apparently we are supposed to feel sorry for the middle class who can now only afford a 40 inch flatscreen rather than the 50 inch the rich people can afford. i'd venture that a good portion of the top-5% from the 60s would be more than happy to switch lives with the middle class of today.
 
#37
#37
rjd970 said:
Well, the original question was what income bracket, and you just said middle class. Middle class has changed. In fact, Lower, Upper, and Middle class has changed. As a percentage of aggregate income, they are earning less and less every year. The top 5% was pretty steady until 1980 and have since started earning more.

No agenda here, just showing demographics. I personally don't care how much the top 5% earn, they pay most the taxes, but they have done significantly better than every other income bracket, especially since 1980.
Click to expand...


nvm
 
Last edited:
#38
#38
MG1968 said:
that's what I was wondering, as with the case of rjd's pretty, but nearly illegible graph above.

income is dynamic and the left, unfortunately, always want to paint the picture of one man getting poorer because one rich man is taking everything from him.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing before tax, but can't find it from the link above.

Sorry about the picture, not sure how to format it so it isn't so big fuzzy.
 
#39
#39
rjd970 said:
Well, the original question was what income bracket, and you just said middle class. Middle class has changed. In fact, Lower, Upper, and Middle class has changed. As a percentage of aggregate income, they are earning less and less every year. The top 5% was pretty steady until 1980 and have since started earning more.

No agenda here, just showing demographics. I personally don't care how much the top 5% earn, they pay most the taxes, but they have done significantly better than every other income bracket, especially since 1980.
Click to expand...

why is the % of aggregate income even relavant? so you'd rather get a 10% raise if your neighbor is getting a 10% raise, rather than you get a 20% raise and your neighbor gets a 50% raise?
 
#40
#40
droski said:
the average american is stupid and and lazy. they are jealous of those smart and hard working people capitalism helps the most (from their point of view)
Click to expand...

DC Vol said:
What defines the "average american" to you? Income bracket? Education level?

I'm just curious.
Click to expand...

droski said:
middle class.
Click to expand...

That's an arrogant attitude you've got. You do know that most physicians, engineers, pharmacists, IT workers, etc are considered "Middle-Class" (though on the upper end), right?

All the people in those professions are stupid and lazy?
 
#41
#41
droski said:
Yes apparently we are supposed to feel sorry for the middle class who can now only afford a 40 inch flatscreen rather than the 50 inch the rich people can afford. i'd venture that a good portion of the top-5% from the 60s would be more than happy to switch lives with the middle class of today.
Click to expand...

All relative. I'd venture to say the same thing about the top 5% and my lifestyle 30 years from now. So what?

And it is a little more than the difference between a 40 inch and 50 inch flat screen, given the top 5% are earning equal what the bottom 80% combined are. Again, it is what it is, I just think your oversimplifying things with your flatscreen analogy.
 
#42
#42
rjd970 said:
All relative. I'd venture to say the same thing about the top 5% and my lifestyle 30 years from now. So what?

And it is a little more than the difference between a 40 inch and 50 inch flat screen, given the top 5% are earning equal what the bottom 80% combined are. Again, it is what it is, I just think your oversimplifying things with your flatscreen analogy.
Click to expand...

Well, given this is from someone that thinks the whole middle-class is stupid and lazy.
 
#43
#43
DC Vol said:
That's an arrogant attitude you've got. You do know that most physicians, engineers, pharmacists, IT workers, etc are considered "Middle-Class" (though on the upper end), right?

All the people in those professions are stupid and lazy?
Click to expand...

actually that's "upper middle class"

rjd970 said:
All relative. I'd venture to say the same thing about the top 5% and my lifestyle 30 years from now. So what?

And it is a little more than the difference between a 40 inch and 50 inch flat screen, given the top 5% are earning equal what the bottom 80% combined are. Again, it is what it is, I just think your oversimplifying things with your flatscreen analogy.
Click to expand...

The point is the middle class is far better off today than they were before and if that isn't what matters I don't know what does. and let's not forget the cost of living for the top-5% is generally much higher since they tend to be in more expensive locations.
 
Last edited:
#45
#45
rjd970 said:
All relative. I'd venture to say the same thing about the top 5% and my lifestyle 30 years from now. So what?

And it is a little more than the difference between a 40 inch and 50 inch flat screen, given the top 5% are earning equal what the bottom 80% combined are. Again, it is what it is, I just think your oversimplifying things with your flatscreen analogy.
Click to expand...

and you're playing the class envy card.

the top 5% of wage earners, while they're not digging ditches or serving watery soup to homeless people, still work for their money. I'm also 100% positive that my next job will not be with someone in the bottom 80%.
 
#46
#46
droski said:
The point is the middle class is far better off today than they were before and if that isn't what matters I don't know what does. and let's not forget the cost of living for the top-5% is generally much higher since they tend to be in more expensive locations.
Click to expand...

My point is the same, you're just too busy focusing on what you want and feel the need to be defensive.

How about this? The middle class is far better off today than they were before. The upper class is far, far, far, far, far, far better off than they were before.
 
#47
#47
rjd970 said:
My point is the same, you're just too busy focusing on what you want and feel the need to be defensive.

How about this? The middle class is far better off today than they were before. The upper class is far, far, far, far, far, far better off than they were before.
Click to expand...

so what?
 
#48
#48
rjd970 said:
My point is the same, you're just too busy focusing on what you want and feel the need to be defensive.

How about this? The middle class is far better off today than they were before. The upper class is far, far, far, far, far, far better off than they were before.
Click to expand...

even if i concede the upper class is far better off. why does it matter? if you think the rich dont' deserve all this money and what they do is easy, why aren't you <aka the middle class> doing it too?
 
#49
#49
MG1968 said:
and you're playing the class envy card.

the top 5% of wage earners, while they're not digging ditches or serving watery soup to homeless people, still work for their money. I'm also 100% positive that my next job will not be with someone in the bottom 80%.
Click to expand...

No I'm not, that is what you are deciding to focus on. Anytime any of these statistics are brought up, the right wing types are the one that bring up class envy crap and feel the need to get all defensive about it. All I posted is the data, it is what it is. I have no doubt that the top 5% work for their money....but do they, and have they, worked harder than 80% of other wage earners to get it? I don't know, maybe. Hard work is involved at all levels, but I would venture to say that the difference between being rich and super rich has more to do with cathcing breaks and being lucky than it does with anything else. At those levels everybody is working hard and smart.
 
#50
#50
droski said:
even if i concede the upper class is far better off. why does it matter? if you think the rich dont' deserve all this money and what they do is easy, why aren't you <aka the middle class> doing it too?
Click to expand...
What about the spoiled brats that inherit money...they don't bust their azz.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top