Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 ... 15
Send Topic Print
Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth (Read 16013 times)
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #120 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 11:44am
 
Hobby Lobby's founders have made it clear that any abortion and certain contraceptives are unacceptable in their eyes, yet the company's 401(k) plan has millions of dollars invested in funds that own the companies that make birth control methods including Plan B, the so-called "morning after" drug.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/01/investing/hobby-lobby-401k-contraception/
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
Phemanderac
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #121 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 11:51am
 
vikaryan wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 8:56am:
All generalizations are false.



Generally speaking of course...
Back to top
 

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..
 
IP Logged
 
Phemanderac
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #122 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 11:57am
 
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 1:09pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:47pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:33pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:27pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:25pm:
Winston Smith wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:00pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 11:59am:
Winston Smith wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 11:57am:
What is being considered wealth here, is ultimately the proceeds of crime derived through access to and participation in corrupt system. The market or economy is the administration of spoils gained through organised crime and military conquest. While they may have good intentions, most wealthy people are benefitting from the proceeds of crime and affiliation with criminal networks.



You gotta be in it to win it


What does that even mean? Roll Eyes

oh winnie, it means you don't like the system , but, guess what, its the only game in town, so you had better start playing Wink

better shutdown oz politic then as no discussion shall be tolerated  Cool



again, you would be showing very little intelligence if you thought the system was going to change because someone has a tantrum on an internet forum. Wink

We are the system!

Buyer and seller and voter: it's all us!

You have a curious idea of a what a tantrum is  Grin



quite right, we are the system, this system has created wealth inequality.
it always seems to be the people at the bottom end of the wealth scale  who are bitching.

If you play AFL and someone else is bigger and more athletic then you, bad luck, you lose, that's the football system. go to the gym , bulk up , train harder.

If you play "the current economic system, the only game in town" and theres someone more successful then you, bad luck, you lose, educate yourself, train harder, work harder.

What you don't do is have the whimpy little guys look at the AFL players and say

"boo hoo, theres athletic ability inequality, how dare they be so superior to me"
if you do, you be a sore loser and not much of a realist Wink


So in effect then, those who manage to get by happily on the welfare system are intelligent people who merely play the only game in town?
Back to top
 

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..
 
IP Logged
 
Phemanderac
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #123 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:00pm
 
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 8:10pm:
Why this intense hatred of the super rich.

Karrie webb becomes the first australian number 1 world golfer....i feel pride in my heart.
Sam stossur wins the US open...i feel pride in my heart.
Its quite likely Gina Rhinehardt will be crowned the worlds richest woman...i feel pride in my heart.
Proud of her success , on behalf of all i australians , i say, i admire your achievements.


It seems to me that the "intense" views expressed are about the inequitable division of wealth. That would be slightly different to "intense hatred of the wealthy" per se.


Back to top
 

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #124 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:06pm
 
The French economist Thomas Piketty (Paris School of Economics) discussed his new book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century at the Graduate Center. In this landmark work, Piketty argues that the main driver of inequality—the tendency of returns on capital to exceed the rate of economic growth—threatens to generate extreme inequalities that stir discontent and undermine democratic values. He calls for political action and policy intervention. Joseph Stiglitz (Columbia University), Paul Krugman (Princeton University), and Steven Durlauf (University of Wisconsin—Madison) participated in a panel moderated by LIS Senior Scholar Branko Milanovic. The event was introduced by LIS Director Janet Gornick, professor of political science and sociology at the Graduate Center.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heOVJM2JZxI
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #125 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:08pm
 
Phemanderac wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 11:57am:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 1:09pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:47pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:33pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:27pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:25pm:
Winston Smith wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:00pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 11:59am:
Winston Smith wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 11:57am:
What is being considered wealth here, is ultimately the proceeds of crime derived through access to and participation in corrupt system. The market or economy is the administration of spoils gained through organised crime and military conquest. While they may have good intentions, most wealthy people are benefitting from the proceeds of crime and affiliation with criminal networks.



You gotta be in it to win it


What does that even mean? Roll Eyes

oh winnie, it means you don't like the system , but, guess what, its the only game in town, so you had better start playing Wink

better shutdown oz politic then as no discussion shall be tolerated  Cool



again, you would be showing very little intelligence if you thought the system was going to change because someone has a tantrum on an internet forum. Wink

We are the system!

Buyer and seller and voter: it's all us!

You have a curious idea of a what a tantrum is  Grin



quite right, we are the system, this system has created wealth inequality.
it always seems to be the people at the bottom end of the wealth scale  who are bitching.

If you play AFL and someone else is bigger and more athletic then you, bad luck, you lose, that's the football system. go to the gym , bulk up , train harder.

If you play "the current economic system, the only game in town" and theres someone more successful then you, bad luck, you lose, educate yourself, train harder, work harder.

What you don't do is have the whimpy little guys look at the AFL players and say

"boo hoo, theres athletic ability inequality, how dare they be so superior to me"
if you do, you be a sore loser and not much of a realist Wink


So in effect then, those who manage to get by happily on the welfare system are intelligent people who merely play the only game in town?

During a mining boom i think the black market for legal medication does a lot of welfare recipients very well indeed,
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
Phemanderac
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #126 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:09pm
 
aquascoot wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 11:06am:
ian wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 10:55am:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 10:03pm:
ian wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 9:50pm:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 4:34pm:
Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 2:12pm:
Thanks Winston,

You reminded me.

Aqua - Did you notice how Howard was very fit. His daily walk were exactly that is recommended by a doctor.
Abbott .......... well, Ironman triathlete competitor, cyclist, boxer.

Rudd ..............


That's so gay.

(Not that there's anything wrong with that of course.) Wink

Whats gay about being an athlete? Please elaborate winston.


Nothing, I was merely commenting on the latent homosexuality in Sprintycyclist's comments regarding the men he admires and why. Roll Eyes
I think he might have been making the point that athletic achievement sometimes goes hand in hand with personal achievement in general. Certainly being in top physical condition is a pre requisite to having a strong feeling of self worth and purpose in my opinion.


Latent homosexuality,  WTF.

fatties like Palmer obviously have poor self discipline.
no thanks.
I like leaders who have a little more mental toughness than that marshmallow


And substantial wealth...
Back to top
 

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #127 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:18pm
 
“The American political system is overrun by money. Economic inequality translates into political inequality, and political inequality yields increasing economic inequality.”

— Economist Joseph Stiglitz (New York Times)


http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/inequality-is-not-inevitable/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #128 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:19pm
 
aquascoot wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 6:54am:
wealth =  power  .

you cannot have an equal distribution of power. the world, society, the economy, human relationships, workplaces and families rely on the unequal distribution of power.

you can lead
you can follow
or you can get out of the way.

this looney tunes thread, suggesting that there should be equal distribution of wealth, based on no other premise than that it "seems" like a good idea, is total bunkum.

people can be ambitious and people can try to climb the ladder, people can get wealth and power because they have shown they have legitimate talents and people are willing to hand over some of their wealth/power to someone who is better able to use it.
this is totally a case of free will.
But to say the system is flawed because some people have more wealth or some people have more power is just bananas. the whole world relies on competition, always has and always will.
this socialist nirvana is soooooo naïve as an idea.

as we now move into an era where intelligence should produce economic success, we should see the more intelligent assume more and more wealth and more and more power.
How on earth can this be a bad thing.

Markets fail- money is socialism!

Cheesy Cheesy
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #129 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:30pm
 
"Zillionaire" Nick Hanauer warns of coming revolution


Nick Hanauer, internet entrepreneur, has a message for his fellow “zillionaires”: the revolution is coming.


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#ixzz368C0EBHD


Mr Hanauer, an early investor in internet retail giant Amazon, says like many of his fellow one-percenters, he owns his own yacht, multiple homes and private jet. He says he acquired all his wealth by seeing the potential of the internet and acting on it.

Now, he writes in Politico magazine, he sees a different kind of future, and the outlook for people like him is not a bright one:

If we don’t do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn’t eventually come out.

Do you think the US is special or different, he asks. You’re wrong. No nation is immune, he says - just ask the Russian tsars or the French aristocracy.

Things are going to change, he says, and when they do it will happen quickly - but it doesn’t have to be this way.

Mr Hanauer endorses what he calls “middle-out” economics. He advocates raising the minimum wage and endorses Seattle’s recent move to raise the lowest hourly wage for an employee in the city jurisdiction to $15 (£8.80).

By paying Americans a “living wage”, he writes, it will relieve some of the burden on the federal government to provide programs like food stamps, rent assistance and medical-care subsidies. That will help conservatives get their wish of trimming government spending.

He concludes that while the public is starting to view the capitalist system as broken, it can still work as long as it is regulated.

"It can be managed either to benefit the few in the near term or the many in the long term," he writes. "The work of democracies is to bend it to the latter."

Rick Newman of Yahoo Finance thinks Mr Hanauer is getting a bit too worked up, however.

"The rich ought to chill out," he writes. "While the masses may envy their wealth, there’s no evidence of a revolution brewing, or even a well-behaved civil disturbance."

He agrees that Mr Hanauer has identified some disturbing trends and that steps should be taken to address income inequality.

"It’s nearly inevitable there will be government spending cuts and, yes, tax hikes, when the government’s finances become unsustainable, which could take a decade or more," he says. "When it happens, the politicians in Washington will find ways to spread the pain around, and America will muddle through."

Pitchforks or muddling. It seems these are the choices.

http://theredpillnetwork.tumblr.com/post/90385893480/internet-billionaire-nick-hanauer-warns-of-coming
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #130 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:36pm
 
vikaryan wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:18pm:
“The American political system is overrun by money. Economic inequality translates into political inequality, and political inequality yields increasing economic inequality.”

— Economist Joseph Stiglitz (New York Times)


http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/inequality-is-not-inevitable/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Dodgy free-trade agreements keep this 'valuable' money supply away from the poor countries who would just soak it up and devalue everything.

There are no free-markets!

Free-markets are an idea that exist in ones head only: the assumptions involved in free-market ideas include the idea of the free-flow of information(perfect information) so that perfect consumer and supplier choices can be made etc...

Secrecy is a big thing, but of course!

Perfect consumer and supplier choices would breed perfect efficiencies i.e. productivity but because such things don't exist people hoard money knowing it will be soaked up by inefficieny at some point.

Call it friction.

Always recycle is the motto: when companies lobby government or just give money then they are basically recycling--> trying to make their expenditures efficient.

When markets fail this can mean death, loss of a house or car of serious illness. People hoard money because at some point the markets will do something unexpected,... hence socialism trying to smooth the decision making process.

Money itself is socialism.. which means government itself is socialism,.. but of course!
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
aquascoot
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 36654
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #131 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:39pm
 
Phemanderac wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 11:57am:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 1:09pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:47pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:33pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:27pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:25pm:
Winston Smith wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 12:00pm:
aquascoot wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 11:59am:
Winston Smith wrote on Jun 30th, 2014 at 11:57am:
What is being considered wealth here, is ultimately the proceeds of crime derived through access to and participation in corrupt system. The market or economy is the administration of spoils gained through organised crime and military conquest. While they may have good intentions, most wealthy people are benefitting from the proceeds of crime and affiliation with criminal networks.



You gotta be in it to win it


What does that even mean? Roll Eyes

oh winnie, it means you don't like the system , but, guess what, its the only game in town, so you had better start playing Wink

better shutdown oz politic then as no discussion shall be tolerated  Cool



again, you would be showing very little intelligence if you thought the system was going to change because someone has a tantrum on an internet forum. Wink

We are the system!

Buyer and seller and voter: it's all us!

You have a curious idea of a what a tantrum is  Grin



quite right, we are the system, this system has created wealth inequality.
it always seems to be the people at the bottom end of the wealth scale  who are bitching.

If you play AFL and someone else is bigger and more athletic then you, bad luck, you lose, that's the football system. go to the gym , bulk up , train harder.

If you play "the current economic system, the only game in town" and theres someone more successful then you, bad luck, you lose, educate yourself, train harder, work harder.

What you don't do is have the whimpy little guys look at the AFL players and say

"boo hoo, theres athletic ability inequality, how dare they be so superior to me"
if you do, you be a sore loser and not much of a realist Wink


So in effect then, those who manage to get by happily on the welfare system are intelligent people who merely play the only game in town?


this is indisputable, collecting welfare has always been the intelligent thing to do.
i think it is somebodys "law" that only a fool refuses free money from the government.
a market garden near me is farmed almost exclusively by vietnamese and chinese workers. all for cash and every thursday, horticulture ceases as centrelink forms are put in.
how many chinese resturants pay their staff cash under the counter. i doubt many even have a cash register  Wink Wink.
i have no problem with this.
the asian is intelligent.
he is playing the system.
a fool and his money are soon parted and there is no denying that the federal government is run by fools,
the money is better in the hands of a dynamic, entrepreneurial , small business minded asian community. they will invest it more wisely then in pink batts and school sheds Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
vikaryan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 453
Gender: male
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #132 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:47pm
 
“If we don’t do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn’t eventually come out. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It’s not if, it’s when.”

— The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats

“Which is why the fundamental law of capitalism must be: If workers have more money, businesses have more customers. Which makes middle-class consumers, not rich businesspeople like us, the true job creators. Which means a thriving middle class is the source of American prosperity, not a consequence of it. The middle class creates us rich people, not the other way around.”

—  The Pitchforks Are Coming … For Us Plutocrats - Nick Hanauer - POLITICO Magazine

in which a 0.01% multi-billionaire exhorts his fellows to push for sensible policy changes now, before the revolution that history shows to be inevitable, suddenly appears.

The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats ...

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014_Page2.html
Back to top
 

We fight a holy war against the fat and the corrupt and the sinful and the unbelieving!
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #133 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 2:26pm
 
vikaryan wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 12:47pm:
“If we don’t do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn’t eventually come out. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It’s not if, it’s when.”

— The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats

“Which is why the fundamental law of capitalism must be: If workers have more money, businesses have more customers. Which makes middle-class consumers, not rich businesspeople like us, the true job creators. Which means a thriving middle class is the source of American prosperity, not a consequence of it. The middle class creates us rich people, not the other way around.”

—  The Pitchforks Are Coming … For Us Plutocrats - Nick Hanauer - POLITICO Magazine

in which a 0.01% multi-billionaire exhorts his fellows to push for sensible policy changes now, before the revolution that history shows to be inevitable, suddenly appears.

The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats ...

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014_Page2.html

9-11 happened: globalised world remember!

Blood for oil: it's about resources!

The pitchforks are here  Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
ian
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 9451
Re: Wealth inequality: NEVER judge a man by his wealth
Reply #134 - Jul 2nd, 2014 at 2:35pm
 
aquascoot wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 11:06am:
ian wrote on Jul 2nd, 2014 at 10:55am:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 10:03pm:
ian wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 9:50pm:
Winston Smith wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 4:34pm:
Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 1st, 2014 at 2:12pm:
Thanks Winston,

You reminded me.

Aqua - Did you notice how Howard was very fit. His daily walk were exactly that is recommended by a doctor.
Abbott .......... well, Ironman triathlete competitor, cyclist, boxer.

Rudd ..............


That's so gay.

(Not that there's anything wrong with that of course.) Wink

Whats gay about being an athlete? Please elaborate winston.


Nothing, I was merely commenting on the latent homosexuality in Sprintycyclist's comments regarding the men he admires and why. Roll Eyes
I think he might have been making the point that athletic achievement sometimes goes hand in hand with personal achievement in general. Certainly being in top physical condition is a pre requisite to having a strong feeling of self worth and purpose in my opinion.


Latent homosexuality,  WTF.

fatties like Palmer obviously have poor self discipline.
no thanks.
I like leaders who have a little more mental toughness than that marshmallow
I dont know the man but his wealth may very well be based solely on his ability to manipulate others, I dont call that a personal achievement. Certainly I would have to say anyone in that condition has a very weak character, I find it hard to have respect for them and I wouldnt vote for them.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 ... 15
Send Topic Print