Wealth and Inequality

#2
#2
Nothing new here. Apparently everyone's richer now because the top 1% are richer and everyone's prospering from it. Right?
 
#4
#4
4 kinds of threads in the Politics forums:

We're destroying the environment

Republicans are racist and Tp members are REALLY racist

Religion sucks

Eat the Rich




I'm truly shocked to see another eat the rich thread.

Really. I'm shocked.

It's like we've never had this debate already 500 million times over.
 
#5
#5
4 kinds of threads in the Politics forums:

We're destroying the environment

Republicans are racist and Tp members are REALLY racist

Religion sucks

Eat the Rich




I'm truly shocked to see another eat the rich thread.

Really. I'm shocked.

It's like we've never had this debate already 500 million times over.

how long have u been around?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
Wow smart people are still making money while the uneducated continue to languish. In other news, water is wet.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#12
#12
Wow smart people are still making money while the uneducated continue to languish. In other news, water is wet.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

True. But you and I both know it isn't all about being smart and working hard. Having those qualities doesn't gurantee wealth, and not having them doesn't preclude getting wealth either.
 
#13
#13
I gotta throw in the idea that the most intelligent people do what they do because they enjoy it and put no value on money. Personal opinion, though.
 
#14
#14
Just out of curiosity, where are you on the bank bailouts? Agree, disagree? Government shouldn't get involved, right?

this is a double edged question because it was the government that forced the banks to take on bad loans and because of that the bundling which caused the problem began.


If government would have stayed out of it none of it would have happened.

But to answer your question ... they should have been allowed to fail. I know this is not what many people on here will say but it is the truth.
 
#15
#15
this is a double edged question because it was the government that forced the banks to take on bad loans and because of that the bundling which caused the problem began.


If government would have stayed out of it none of it would have happened.

But to answer your question ... they should have been allowed to fail. I know this is not what many people on here will say but it is the truth.

I tend to agree with this on strict philosophical grounds. I have some investments, so it would have hurt me if the system really would have crashed, but that said, the government bailout helped some people way more than others.

And to your point about government forcing the bad loans, that may be so, but nobody really put up a fight against it because they were making a ton of money in what they had to know were essentially bogus loans.

Whatever it was, with government forcing loans, bank bailouts, etc, it certainly wasn't free market or capitalism at work.
 
#16
#16
no it wasn't free market.

i would also agree with the not much fight thing also
 
#18
#18
Sorry but the Top 1% didn't get "Lucky"
Posted via VolNation Mobile

As a rule maybe, but hard work and intelligence can get you you in position to make that kind of money, there is some amount of luck or happenstance that gets one to the top. The top 1% doesn't stay the same people all the time, it is fluid. Some professional athletes are probably in that category...they work very hard, but they had to win the genetic lottery to get to that level. At that point, it isn't just about the hardest working.
 
#20
#20
As a rule maybe, but hard work and intelligence can get you you in position to make that kind of money, there is some amount of luck or happenstance that gets one to the top. The top 1% doesn't stay the same people all the time, it is fluid. Some professional athletes are probably in that category...they work very hard, but they had to win the genetic lottery to get to that level. At that point, it isn't just about the hardest working.

*cough*Inheritance*cough*

Plenty of hardworking people in the top 1%, but some were at the right time and place and were afforded opportunities that others weren't. Business partnerships and whatnot, ya dig?
 
#22
#22
As a rule maybe, but hard work and intelligence can get you you in position to make that kind of money, there is some amount of luck or happenstance that gets one to the top. The top 1% doesn't stay the same people all the time, it is fluid. Some professional athletes are probably in that category...they work very hard, but they had to win the genetic lottery to get to that level. At that point, it isn't just about the hardest working.

sweet goodness....lifes lottery..........
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#24
#24
*cough*Inheritance*cough*

Plenty of hardworking people in the top 1%, but some were at the right time and place and were afforded opportunities that others weren't. Business partnerships and whatnot, ya dig?

I dig. I find fault in the default argument where those at the top are always the hardest working and most intelligent, and those at the bottom are always the laziest and dumbest. For those that make a ton of money and pimp capitalism like it is flawless...it is a convenient position, but that doesn't mean it is reality. Large inheritance and professional athletes owe a huge part of their wealth to luck.
 
#25
#25
I dig. I find fault in the default argument where those at the top are always the hardest working and most intelligent, and those at the bottom are always the laziest and dumbest. For those that make a ton of money and pimp capitalism like it is flawless...it is a convenient position, but that doesn't mean it is reality. Large inheritance and professional athletes owe a huge part of their wealth to luck.

what is your beef with inheritance.......
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 

VN Store



Back
Top