Income Redistribution

[ReignIB]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
…
In our system, thats impossible - you get successful by being the owner of the company and getting lots of people to work for you. So even if you climb the ladder or build a company, that still leaves the majority of people in that company unsuccessful. Because any one person could, hypothetically, become rich at the expense of the success of others does not make it good.
[/quote]

If your measure of “success” is being an owner of a fortune 500 company, then yes, becoming THAT successful is a product of some extraordinary circumstances.
Although you’d be surprised how many of those folks weren’t born into wealth.

[CappedAndPlanIt]

[quote]ReignIB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
…
In our system, thats impossible - you get successful by being the owner of the company and getting lots of people to work for you. So even if you climb the ladder or build a company, that still leaves the majority of people in that company unsuccessful. Because any one person could, hypothetically, become rich at the expense of the success of others does not make it good.
[/quote]

If your measure of “success” is being an owner of a fortune 500 company, then yes, becoming THAT successful is a product of some extraordinary circumstances.
Although you’d be surprised how many of those folks weren’t born into wealth.
[/quote]

I often wonder about that, actually. You have the capitalist “rags to riches” fantasy, and the opposite “rich kid gets handed a company by his dad” narrative.

Personally I expect most simply get on board in a company and climb the corporate ladder.

Have there been any studies done on the subject?

[ZEB]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.

[CappedAndPlanIt]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

[ZEB]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.

[CappedAndPlanIt]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?

[ZEB]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?[/quote]

Shirk - To evade. A shirker would be one who avoids work. Never heard that before?

[CappedAndPlanIt]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?[/quote]

Shirk - To evade. A shirker would be one who avoids work. Never heard that before?
[/quote]

The vast, vast majority of poor in america aren’t “shirkers”. Its the work of the poor that fund the rich. Thats the heart of the American economy - get someone elses work to make you a profit. Be the boss. Be an investor. Don’t be the sucker working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour – be the guy that gets lots of money from the work the other guy working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour does.

[ZEB]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?[/quote]

Shirk - To evade. A shirker would be one who avoids work. Never heard that before?
[/quote]

The vast, vast majority of poor in america aren’t “shirkers”. Its the work of the poor that fund the rich. Thats the heart of the American economy - get someone elses work to make you a profit. Be the boss. Be an investor. Don’t be the sucker working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour – be the guy that gets lots of money from the work the other guy working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour does.[/quote]

I don’t think the American worker is a shirker and I never said that. What I said was that we should NOT reward the Shirker. One more point, the recent extension of unemployment benefits does not help the American worker. This extends the time to three years! I interviewed some people the other day to do menial labor at $10 per hour as I refuse to pay anyone minimum wage. Interviewed 5 people and got 5 turn downs! The reason? They all said they could make more, or about the same money on unemployment. I think it’s human nature to continue to get paid to do nothing rather than take a job making about the same money.

I think we both know that here are 5 people who are never going to live the American dream.

[CappedAndPlanIt]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?[/quote]

Shirk - To evade. A shirker would be one who avoids work. Never heard that before?
[/quote]

The vast, vast majority of poor in america aren’t “shirkers”. Its the work of the poor that fund the rich. Thats the heart of the American economy - get someone elses work to make you a profit. Be the boss. Be an investor. Don’t be the sucker working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour – be the guy that gets lots of money from the work the other guy working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour does.[/quote]

I don’t think the American worker is a shirker and I never said that. What I said was that we should NOT reward the Shirker. One more point, the recent extension of unemployment benefits does not help the American worker. This extends the time to three years! I interviewed some people the other day to do menial labor at $10 per hour as I refuse to pay anyone minimum wage. Interviewed 5 people and got 5 turn downs! The reason? They all said they could make more, or about the same money on unemployment. I think it’s human nature to continue to get paid to do nothing rather than take a job making about the same money.

I think we both know that here are 5 people who are never going to live the American dream.
[/quote]

They are also five people who had a one in a million chance of living the American dream anyway, with virtually everything against them.

The whole system being set up to keep them poor eventually causes most people to just give up and take the free money, rationalizing that they have the choice of working very hard and being poor or not working and being poor.

[ZEB]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?[/quote]

Shirk - To evade. A shirker would be one who avoids work. Never heard that before?
[/quote]

The vast, vast majority of poor in america aren’t “shirkers”. Its the work of the poor that fund the rich. Thats the heart of the American economy - get someone elses work to make you a profit. Be the boss. Be an investor. Don’t be the sucker working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour – be the guy that gets lots of money from the work the other guy working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour does.[/quote]

I don’t think the American worker is a shirker and I never said that. What I said was that we should NOT reward the Shirker. One more point, the recent extension of unemployment benefits does not help the American worker. This extends the time to three years! I interviewed some people the other day to do menial labor at $10 per hour as I refuse to pay anyone minimum wage. Interviewed 5 people and got 5 turn downs! The reason? They all said they could make more, or about the same money on unemployment. I think it’s human nature to continue to get paid to do nothing rather than take a job making about the same money.

I think we both know that here are 5 people who are never going to live the American dream.
[/quote]

They are also five people who had a one in a million chance of living the American dream anyway, with virtually everything against them.

The whole system being set up to keep them poor eventually causes most people to just give up and take the free money, rationalizing that they have the choice of working very hard and being poor or not working and being poor.[/quote]

But if it’s set up to keep them down then how is it that some, in fact many actually become well off if not wealthy.

[CappedAndPlanIt]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?[/quote]

Shirk - To evade. A shirker would be one who avoids work. Never heard that before?
[/quote]

The vast, vast majority of poor in america aren’t “shirkers”. Its the work of the poor that fund the rich. Thats the heart of the American economy - get someone elses work to make you a profit. Be the boss. Be an investor. Don’t be the sucker working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour – be the guy that gets lots of money from the work the other guy working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour does.[/quote]

I don’t think the American worker is a shirker and I never said that. What I said was that we should NOT reward the Shirker. One more point, the recent extension of unemployment benefits does not help the American worker. This extends the time to three years! I interviewed some people the other day to do menial labor at $10 per hour as I refuse to pay anyone minimum wage. Interviewed 5 people and got 5 turn downs! The reason? They all said they could make more, or about the same money on unemployment. I think it’s human nature to continue to get paid to do nothing rather than take a job making about the same money.

I think we both know that here are 5 people who are never going to live the American dream.
[/quote]

They are also five people who had a one in a million chance of living the American dream anyway, with virtually everything against them.

The whole system being set up to keep them poor eventually causes most people to just give up and take the free money, rationalizing that they have the choice of working very hard and being poor or not working and being poor.[/quote]

But if it’s set up to keep them down then how is it that some, in fact many actually become well off if not wealthy.
[/quote]

Are you suggesting its not?

Its possible, yes. But even if one individual can rise above poverty, the system still depends on the majority remaining within it.

[florelius]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Jealousy, resentment doesn’t matter. Anyone who is annoyed because another person has more than they do should channel that into more success in their own life. But, I’ve found that those types want to pull the successful person down to their level. They don’t have what it takes to succeed and merely wish that the one who has succeeded start failing until they get to the point where they are over them in some way.

As for equality, it will never happen as it cannot happen. Government can’t do it, business can’t do it. The reason is simple, we are all born with different abilities, desires and into different circumstances and from that will spring success or failure.

That’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Its not that they’re “annoyed because another person has more than they do”. Its that they’re annoyed that they work hard and barely get by while seeing others benefit from their hard work.

I think I’m done trying to explain these things for a little while.[/quote]

I fully understand your point, I just disagree. If they are annoyed because someone is ahead of them financially they have to realize that there are reasons for this occurance. First, if you look at statistics fully 80% of all millionaires in the US are self-made (Read The Millionaire Next Door). Therefore, if they have enough desire and skill and care to take a chance they can go for it. If they don’t have what it takes then they must he happy with what they have. Not that they cannot still improve their lot in life by saving and jockeying for a better position.

And that’s pretty much that.
[/quote]

Is that your new motto? Be arrogant and dismissive by ending every post with “And that’s pretty much that”? Because its gonna get old, quick.[/quote]

Don’t like it? Okay, I’ll stop that was pretty much that…

The “reasons for this occurance” are artificial inequalities set in place by the rich to keep themselves rich and others poor, because their richess is directly dependant on the work of the poor.

Yes there are what I call natural inequalities. Such as the rich kid being smarter than than average because of the attention focused on the little darling by his father the millionaire and his mother the doctor. Then they send him to Yale and he now has an incredible education, inherited money, his fathers friends etc.

Okay, that happens, but as I said most of the time it’s not like that. About 80% of the time the guy makes it on his own. And these inequalities you speak of have more to do with what the guy coming out of the womb. Drive, intelligence etc.

What can you do about those things? Do you think we should reward the shirker just because he doesn’t have as much going for him as the other guy?

And that’s…oh never mind.
[/quote]

The shirker?[/quote]

Shirk - To evade. A shirker would be one who avoids work. Never heard that before?
[/quote]

The vast, vast majority of poor in america aren’t “shirkers”. Its the work of the poor that fund the rich. Thats the heart of the American economy - get someone elses work to make you a profit. Be the boss. Be an investor. Don’t be the sucker working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour – be the guy that gets lots of money from the work the other guy working 60 hours a week for ten bucks an hour does.[/quote]

I don’t think the American worker is a shirker and I never said that. What I said was that we should NOT reward the Shirker. One more point, the recent extension of unemployment benefits does not help the American worker. This extends the time to three years! I interviewed some people the other day to do menial labor at $10 per hour as I refuse to pay anyone minimum wage. Interviewed 5 people and got 5 turn downs! The reason? They all said they could make more, or about the same money on unemployment. I think it’s human nature to continue to get paid to do nothing rather than take a job making about the same money.

I think we both know that here are 5 people who are never going to live the American dream.
[/quote]

They are also five people who had a one in a million chance of living the American dream anyway, with virtually everything against them.

The whole system being set up to keep them poor eventually causes most people to just give up and take the free money, rationalizing that they have the choice of working very hard and being poor or not working and being poor.[/quote]

But if it’s set up to keep them down then how is it that some, in fact many actually become well off if not wealthy.
[/quote]

Are you suggesting its not?

Its possible, yes. But even if one individual can rise above poverty, the system still depends on the majority remaining within it.[/quote]

This is so true and this is why a totally individualistic perspectiv for the average worker is almost always counterproductive. There is a reason why workers have formed unions to pursue theire interrests. For the working masses the best perspective is: “togheter we stand, divided we fall”

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]optheta wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
…And I’m still waiting for Ryan to tell us all where in the world socialism has ever succeeded in a positive way in the long-term.
[/quote]

United States?[/quote]

Ha ha…not yet. And hopefully never.
[/quote]

Haha, he’s actually right. Industry in the United States was allowed to develop behind trade barriers. Otherwise, it would have been strangled in the cradle by British manufacturers (some of whom actually did set out to do just this).

The government subsidized and steered industry towards building the railroads.

Just a couple examples of historical facts conservatives don’t tell you about (and usually don’t know themselves).

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

ZEB wrote:It’s a darn poor illustration. In America if you don’t want to work for one company you quit and go to work for another one. If you don’t like being a plumber you can change careers. If you don’t like working for someone else you can save your money, or borrow some and begin your own business. What a great country we live in - I thank God every day that I was born in America! And I’m sure glad that socialism has no chance of taking hold.

Get real–more than 10% of us can’t find a job at all, let alone change careers according to our whims. Once you have something to say about OUR economy, and not the fantasy one in your head, let me know.

As I’ve shown with my two examples above he did work really hard to get it. Stop pretending to be stupid.

Oh yeah, the investor receiving dividends really worked hard for that. The speculator who profits from moving money around really works hard for that. And by the way, again, I don’t remember you giving any example. For someone who claims to be correct, you’re trying really hard to avoid answering any questions.

It most certainly is. And by the way anything which creates wealth is productive.

It doesn’t produce wealth. Owning capital and demanding economic rent is not productive.

Explain why he doesn’t deserve it.

It’s quite simple–you want to earn money? Earn it. Work for it. Don’t aspire to earn your living off the sweat of another man’s brow.

But again, this has nothing to do with the necessity of socialization.

One more post down and one more time you didn’t name even one socialist country that has succeeded in a positive way long-term.

If you cared to read my earlier post, you’ll note that’s because there ARE NO socialist countries, except possibly Cuba. But, anarcho-syndicalist Spain did very well before they were defeated militarily, nothing to do with the untenability of their economy, which actually became more productive after they threw the bums out. Also, the Mondragon cooperatives are organized in a very socialistic manner. They are the sixth largest company in Spain.

I guess this means that you give up. This means that your theories when put into practice do not work.

He says, as the most capitalist country on earth is reeling under 10% unemployment, 14% poverty and rising, with one in every seven Americans on foodstamps. I tell you, ZEB, you’re comic gold.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
By the way, I would very much love to see you finally start dealing with some numbers, which so far you refuse to do. Probably because they show that you’re wrong.[/quote]

And I’d very much like you to point out a country where socialism has worked in a positive way in the long-term. The US on the other hand has been successful for a long time with capitalism. As my grandmother used to say “the proof is in the pudding”. And my grandfather used to say “you kids get off my lawn” but of course that doesn’t have anything to do with socialism. Or does it? It was his lawn, he owned it and…ah never mind.
[/quote]

Read some history. You might be surprised. The fact is, the US economy developed under conditions that in no way resembled the free-market twaddle you parrot. Trade barriers, subsidization of particular industries, etc. Things that people of your persuasion would normally consider very left-wing(the problem was, the resultant wealth created went straight the top, instead of being distributed amongst the entire working population, who had actually produced the wealth).

Now, of course, we preach free-markets, and denounce government intervention in the economy. The reason why, of course, is that it works, and we don’t want anyone to challenge our economic superiority. Look how fast we were to authorize the TARP bailouts, to draft a stimulus package, to inject liquidity into the system after we knew we were heading into recession (a recent NYT article, in fact, details how much deeper than previously known the Federal Reserve actually went to prop up the economy, and how important it was). Ignore what people say (which is what you’re focused on–what sounds good and patriotic, as opposed to what actually occurs), and watch what they do when the pressure is on.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

ZEB wrote: Could it be because they have virtually single handedly funded the US government? Yeah that must be it.

But they haven’t, you’re continuing to ignore facts. Income tax contributes only about half the total taxes in this country. Seeing as how they’ve gotten the far greater part of the benefits, they’re getting off easy. They should pay more.[/quote]

1. They risked their own capital, or borrowed capital.

2-They’ve usually worked long and hard hours

3-They’ve sacrificed time away from friends and family to do it.

They deserve to keep the money they’ve earned and not have it stolen from them only to be given to those who refuse to contribute to society in a positive way.

Facts.
[/quote]

Catechism.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

ZEB wrote:No? How can you make such an insensitive comment like that? Many young guys from wealthy family’s have fought and died for this country.

Wah. Who cares? It’s a drop in the bucket compared to the number of poor people who have been drafted to go fight the rich men’s wars, or the foreign citizens who die trying to defend their homeland from us.

True, they worked hard and own their own homes or at least pay their rent on time. What right does anyone have to stay on another persons property without compensating them for that? What do you think this is a socialist state?

No. If it were a socialist state, anyone who wanted to work would be able to find a job. But since this is a capitalist state, unemployment is 10%, and one of every seven Americans is on food stamps.

If you don’t work you shouldn’t eat. Simple man, they’re lucky they have food stamps were it up to me that would be a limited program for children only.

True, but in order to enforce this rule, anyone who wants to work must be able to find a job, guaranteed. Right now, over 8 million Americans cannot. And I really hope people like you get elected to office soon. If I could clone you about 534 times and send you to take over Congress, we’d have socialism next weekend.

Barney Frank and his band of incompetent liberal idiots crashed the economy with freddie and fannie - Read about Ryan it won’t be assigned by your socialist professors, but it’s good reading.

Psst. I have read about it. Guess what? You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Fannie and Freddie have been around for decades.

Which reminds me, I’ve posted a ton of facts and documents showing you to be factually wrong about many of your claims. You have still not addressed it. Either address them, or explain why you are dodging the issue.

[quote]More insensitive comments. A man works hard and makes it big in the US and if he loses it all you don’t care? Sad.
[/quote]

Hmm. Just a few lines ago, you said this:

“If you don’t work you shouldn’t eat. Simple man, they’re lucky they have food stamps were it up to me that would be a limited program for children only.”

So, literlly millions of Americans lose their jobs because the millionaire bankers, whose boots you spend all your time licking, crashed the economy, and YOU want them to starve? When Lloyd Blankfein, who was responsible for them losing their job, is sitting in the Hamptons eating caviar? This is OK with you, but you want ME to feel bad for some guy whose stocks go down?

Wow.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
If you want to work, you will be found a job.[/quote]

“Come over here young Ryan, it seems that Vladamere has been watching you and you are not as productive as the other boys-----DEEP SEEEX HEEM”

There are always things that need to be done.

Herding the sheep, haying the field—getting the food for the government elite. A little socialist day is never done.
[/quote]

Nice try, but we could start by:

-rebuilding our decaying infrastructure, which makes us an international laughing stock.

-building a new energy grid, to replace our aging, inefficient one.

-get started on a variety of clean energy initiatives, which would not only reduce our dependence on oil, as your conservatives like to say, but would actually do something the market has been unable to do for 2 years now: create jobs.

Infrastructure, power grid, and clean energy?! Oh my! Socialism is scary!!

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

[quote]ZEB wrote:You know I think you won me over. Free medical care, free food, free money when you retire, free jobs. I think I like that. The government takes care of you from cradle to grave. You make no decisions and you clear any sort of independent thought with the government first before you actually think it.

Of course a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have - Beginning with your freedom!
[/quote]

Free nothing. Everybody must support such public services with a portion of their income. But the great thing is, they’ll be able to do it, because under socialism, they’d actually have an income. Because they could find work.

And actually, you miss the whole point of socialism–the root word is social, remember? You ARE the government. I know that thought terrifies conservatives, but you’ll have to adjust to you changing world sooner or later.