Who know’s… Maybe our resident socialists can answer that.
1 Like
I suppose the only way around that would be to limit ownership, maybe the government can hold on to his stock shares for safe keeping. If the stock prices go up you lose even more because your holding too much value.
I’d just take all of the extra, you know to “help the less equal”. And any dividends he might have coming. And probably that second house too, unless he wants to make it an amenity and allow other employees stay at it as part of a benefits package. But that goes to net pay, so now the 1mm cap goes down proportionally to the value of their use. As does any other benefits. Health ins. Corporate vehicle, etc.
Because if you are going to make it fair, you can’t let any non monetary comps slip through either.
1 Like
God I wish people could fucking understand this! The 18th century called, they want their Mercantilism back. I wish people would stop trying to import it across centuries.
Seriously! I mean look, it’s not fucking rocket science. I know plenty of people who’ve done the same thing on different scales. Show up, work hard, don’t act entitled, don’t be a prick, be a team player. Learn.
2 Likes
No. No no no no no no. NO. This is wrong on every damn level and ESPECIALLY in a fiat money system. THE ECONOMY IS NOT A FIXED PIE.
What? How is that even remotely what’s happening?? No.
And nobody gets this either! THERE IS NO PERFECT SOLUTION. None. Never has been. Bringing everyone down so that people will be “equal” in the suck is a terrible damn idea.
2 Likes
1 Like
An old co-worker of mine grew up in the Ukraine under communism.
The worst loser in our capitalist society is pretty well off compared to even their mid runners.
They didn’t have losers per say. They did have a lot of corpses though. In fact, most of his stories ended with “…then, everybody die.”.
These goofballs that think capitalism sucks need to talk to someone who actually experienced real communism.
4 Likes
I just spent little portions of this day reading this entire thread. I have to say it was quite entertaining but also informative. Learned a ton.
I think one important fact that the left tends to overlook is wealthy families tend to lose most of their wealth within the next 2 generations. This happens for a variety of reasons but the same entitlement that is expressed by many who want free college is a factor. It’s just a different form of entitlement.
If they lose their wealth (i.e businesses) everyone employed by them loses as well.
I don’t believe in a completely unregulated market; the government should protect consumers to an extent. For example, insurance companies should cover people with pre-existing conditions, but everyone with a pre-existing condition should pay into that pot vs all of us without them covering people who drive our insurance through the roof.
I’ve also worked at the VA - Many Vets in my family, I have a deep appreciation for them. Most people working in the VA on salary are often putting in at least 50 hours a week, maybe 60-65 or more on the upper management side. But the people in the hospital also have no control over who gets seen, who gets coverage for what disease, etc, this is done by a completely different branch of the VA.
So when info comes out that Vets have died waiting for care, it is usually on the service connected claims side. The people in the hospital are usually extremely busy. That tells me:
1.) It’s hard to get an appointment because hospitals are servicing large areas.
2.) Deciding who gets care, who doesn’t, and the amount of evidence needed for getting such disability covered is the hardest part of socialized medicine.
Number 1 is alleviated by allowing people to use private hospitals (if you can’t get an appointment within 30 days, or if you live further than 90 miles away from the hospital).
Number 2 is a doozy. Imagine that on a grander scheme for all Americans.
The VA I worked at in Salisbury, NC we did everything, outpatient, acute care, long term care, nursing home, behavioral health and addictions, dental care, literally everything. It was generally always full. Budgets were massive because Congress wants Vets well taken care of, and we still couldn’t manage to help everyone…
3 Likes
When is enough, enough?
10 million, 100 million, 10 billion?
Excellent video, Alrightmiami. That Podeska quote was a classic.
@dt79 and the college funding plan. It’s amazing that the Keely’s of the world can’t seem to follow the logic. Let’s tax the 1 percenters 50%, or 90% or whatever it takes. Let’s say you make 1 million dollars per month. You can work one month for yourself and the rest of the year, you can put the Keelys through college. What reasonable person wouldn’t want to do that? Why not kick back and spend more time at the gym, or reading stuff on your Kindle instead? Poor Keely. No college. Or maybe move the business to Ireland because patriotism is bad anyway. We’re a global world, with a global economy and I’d hate to be a xenophobe, besides I’m part Irish so that isn’t even an issue for me. I can think of lots of things I’d rather do with the rest of my year besides pay for Keely to sit in college for 8 years learning to emulate Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth Warren will let you know, Treco.
4 Likes
But poor little Keely has a plan! Let’s get enough people to throw a tantrum on the streets and Daddy the government will solve everything, even if Daddy has no money!
Doooood, You are confusing the private sector with the GOVERNMENT.
The government is the one that wants to make sure you are subservient. They want you dependent on them so you keep them in power. They are the ones who will push you down and leave you just enough to make ends meet so you don’t revolt if you give them enough power. Eventually, the people they groom for top positions will not be the most qualified in terms of increasing the wealth of the country, but the ones most loyal to them who are able to enact their policies, regardless of how bad, without question while remaining popular among the masses.
Employers in the private sector will want to PULL YOU UP if you have potential because when you develop a higher and higher skillset and make more money, they make more money. If someone, even the CEO, screws up, he can be replaced. This is why even someone from the bottom can get to the top by getting results. When you develop a skillset that gives you enough value, you have leverage. Even at the bottom, they want to pay you what the market dictates to maintain the standard of productivity because to not do so would mean a loss in profits since the ones who will accept a lower wage will have a lower skillset.
You need to look at this from top down, not bottom up.
2 Likes
Why?
The sheer number of people under 65 that qualify as having pre-existing conditions is ridiculous. It gets worse for those over 65 but they are usually covered by medicare.
Without a “high risk pool” for these people you’re edit: possibly letting ~25% of our population not be covered by health insurance. This has a large affect on their productivity in the workforce and in the economy in general.
Not only “why” but by definition that makes what you are buying not even insurance. That makes is no longer a hedge against possible future outcomes. It’s just making other people pay for people getting sick or injured when they don’t bother buying actual insurance.
So why wouldn’t we also make car insurance cover pre-existing accidents?
3 Likes
People tend to think of health insurance and health care as the same thing, but it’s not. Health insurance is a financial product and tool to hedge against possible complications in the future.
@DoubleDuce is correct. Should someone be able to purchase auto insurance after they totaled their car?
3 Likes
I’ve been saying this for quite some time. Why don’t people understand this?
3 Likes
@DoubleDuce @Alrightmiami19c @SkyzykS
Car Insurance does cover “pre-existing accidents” i.e accidents that happened in the past. That’s why their premiums are higher. This similar to a high-risk pool where their premiums would be higher and split amongst other people at high-risk of having to repeatedly use their healthcare.
Auto insurance and Health Insurance aren’t quite the same thing however. Auto Insurance is virtually required, unless you want to pay the penalty in most states. Prior to the ACA Health Insurance did not work in this manner.
If you total your car, you will probably still be able to buy car insurance/not be kicked off your insurance, albeit at a higher rate.
If you have diabetes, are pregnant, have cerebral palsy, or multiple sclerosis, or COPD, or Chronic Pain from whatever injury you had at some point in life, and apply for health insurance, you can be denied.
This cost falls back on you. If your health is poor you can’t work. You could go to the ED for charity care once your illness becomes bad enough, but that strains the system even further.
Why not have a high risk pool that people with pre-existing conditions are covered under? They pay higher premiums and are covered for their condition?
If you have no car because you can’t get car insurance or afford the penalty, you can get a ride, you can take a bus or use some other form of public transportation. There are larger safety nets for this. They’re not really the same, though I see what you were trying to do.
1 Like