JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 1 of 3 12 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 135
  1. #1
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Income Inequality Flash Video

    Not sure if this has been shared yet, but I thought it was very telling and tells reality in a slideshow-esque manner that helps many people see what is going on. I for one think it is sickening and, to make matters worse, these are the people that Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to preserve tax breaks for at the expense of everyone else.

    Wealth Inequality Flash Presentation

  2. #2

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    The assumption that this is somehow unfair is wrong. It assumes for one thing that ours is a zero sum economy, that is, for someone to have less someone else must have more,and vice versa, and therefore, if the rich have more, they must have taken it from the poor. That was true in per-industrial economies, but not today. Bill Gates did not become rich by taking it from the poor. Oprah did not become rich by taking it from the poor. In a huge economy like ours, and the world, fortunes are often, probably most often made by a very small profit each from millions of people.
    A much more important point is that it is still possible--not even improbable--to become very wealthy in the US, and many of the wealthiest people did so in a short period of time with new innovation. All the fortunes made from the internet, for instance. The idea that we should confiscate from the rich because other are less rich, is dangerous, because it limits the incentive to innovate, build and create.
    It is also a mistake to focus on wealth as opposed to income, because it does not tell us much about relative comfort. A person making a hundred thousand a year, living fairly well in an apartment will often not have much net worth. A large percentage people would rather spend than save or invest. But the implication that all those with low "wealth" are living in poverty is a fallacy.
    My readers here, of course, will recognize the inherent hypocrisy of the liberal position on wealth. Any liberal will tell you that we have too many poor people, but then he will also say that we should not slow the importation of millions of additional poor people. ???
    If we want to raise the new worth of Americans let us give them a chance.

  3. #3
    . chrisrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,343

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    The assumption that this is somehow unfair is wrong. It assumes for one thing that ours is a zero sum economy, that is, for someone to have less someone else must have more,and vice versa, and therefore, if the rich have more, they must have taken it from the poor. That was true in per-industrial economies, but not today. Bill Gates did not become rich by taking it from the poor. Oprah did not become rich by taking it from the poor. In a huge economy like ours, and the world, fortunes are often, probably most often made by a very small profit each from millions of people.
    A much more important point is that it is still possible--not even improbable--to become very wealthy in the US, and many of the wealthiest people did so in a short period of time with new innovation. All the fortunes made from the internet, for instance. The idea that we should confiscate from the rich because other are less rich, is dangerous, because it limits the incentive to innovate, build and create.
    It is also a mistake to focus on wealth as opposed to income, because it does not tell us much about relative comfort. A person making a hundred thousand a year, living fairly well in an apartment will often not have much net worth. A large percentage people would rather spend than save or invest. But the implication that all those with low "wealth" are living in poverty is a fallacy.
    My readers here, of course, will recognize the inherent hypocrisy of the liberal position on wealth. Any liberal will tell you that we have too many poor people, but then he will also say that we should not slow the importation of millions of additional poor people. ???
    If we want to raise the new worth of Americans let us give them a chance.
    My readers?

    My readers here, of course, will recognize the inherent hypocrisy of the liberal position on wealth.
    Wrong: It's the immigrant in the woodpile.

    ...with history the final judge of our deeds. - JFK

  4. #4
    of the 99%
    Just_Believe18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,208

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    The assumption that this is somehow unfair is wrong. It assumes for one thing that ours is a zero sum economy, that is, for someone to have less someone else must have more,and vice versa, and therefore, if the rich have more, they must have taken it from the poor. That was true in per-industrial economies, but not today. Bill Gates did not become rich by taking it from the poor. Oprah did not become rich by taking it from the poor. In a huge economy like ours, and the world, fortunes are often, probably most often made by a very small profit each from millions of people.
    A much more important point is that it is still possible--not even improbable--to become very wealthy in the US, and many of the wealthiest people did so in a short period of time with new innovation. All the fortunes made from the internet, for instance. The idea that we should confiscate from the rich because other are less rich, is dangerous, because it limits the incentive to innovate, build and create.
    It is also a mistake to focus on wealth as opposed to income, because it does not tell us much about relative comfort. A person making a hundred thousand a year, living fairly well in an apartment will often not have much net worth. A large percentage people would rather spend than save or invest. But the implication that all those with low "wealth" are living in poverty is a fallacy.
    My readers here, of course, will recognize the inherent hypocrisy of the liberal position on wealth. Any liberal will tell you that we have too many poor people, but then he will also say that we should not slow the importation of millions of additional poor people. ???
    If we want to raise the new worth of Americans let us give them a chance.
    You're not listening to the video. A big part of its focus was how the average American viewed the income disparity in this country and how they think it should be (92% bipartisan agreement there). The reality shows a stark contrast that is so grave, it is inflammatory. The 1% and .1% have so much wealth, they defy most graphic organizers. Have you seen the bubble visual? It's like comparing Mercury to the Sun.

    It is wrong when the top 1% and .1% control an obscene amount of wealth beyond even the perception of what most Americans view as fair. What this means is that individuals like yourself are given misinformation that somehow the poor are better off than the rich who somehow continue to struggle being taxed at levels far below decades past. You complain that the rich are being taxed and demonized, but they've never been richer in modern history. This is an undeniable fact. So how has the "liberal agenda" equalized the poor and middle-class? There's no statistical fact to prove that misperception. The poor continue to get poorer, and the rich continue to get richer.
    #439th oldest member on JUB.

  5. #5
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    The assumption that this is somehow unfair is wrong. It assumes for one thing that ours is a zero sum economy, that is, for someone to have less someone else must have more,and vice versa, and therefore, if the rich have more, they must have taken it from the poor. That was true in per-industrial economies, but not today. Bill Gates did not become rich by taking it from the poor. Oprah did not become rich by taking it from the poor. In a huge economy like ours, and the world, fortunes are often, probably most often made by a very small profit each from millions of people.
    A much more important point is that it is still possible--not even improbable--to become very wealthy in the US, and many of the wealthiest people did so in a short period of time with new innovation. All the fortunes made from the internet, for instance. The idea that we should confiscate from the rich because other are less rich, is dangerous, because it limits the incentive to innovate, build and create.
    It is also a mistake to focus on wealth as opposed to income, because it does not tell us much about relative comfort. A person making a hundred thousand a year, living fairly well in an apartment will often not have much net worth. A large percentage people would rather spend than save or invest. But the implication that all those with low "wealth" are living in poverty is a fallacy.
    My readers here, of course, will recognize the inherent hypocrisy of the liberal position on wealth. Any liberal will tell you that we have too many poor people, but then he will also say that we should not slow the importation of millions of additional poor people. ???
    If we want to raise the new worth of Americans let us give them a chance.
    First off, it is just not possible for anyone who works hard to become rich. There are innumerable factors that have to fall into place for someone to become as wealthy as the top 1% (hell, even the top 5%) that are beyond people's control. Secondly, there is a great difference between those people who work hard, create something, and then build up their wealth from marketing their creations and those who generate their wealth off of gaming the system, stacking the deck in their favor, and screwing over the rest of the people below them. Thirdly, there is no problem with there being a distribution of wealth that allows for a moderately richer upper class, a healthy middle class, and a lower-income lower class. However, the current distribution of wealth is obscenely skewed and there isn't a way for the average worker to change that distribution. When you have a finite amount of income in the country (one number for 2009 was $54 trillion) and the upper echelon takes more and more, that leaves less and less for everyone below them. There isn't an infinite amount of money out there that anyone that works hard can tap into as soon as they hit the hard work threshold.

    The point of the animation was to show that there is a huge wealth distribution problem in the country. We don't have a distribution of work problem, as I can guarantee you a graph of the amount of work performed versus the income level would look much more balanced, if not slightly skewed the opposite direction of the income. The system is setup to keep rich people getting richer while everyone else is stuck in an income flatline.

  6. #6
    GiancarloC
    Guest

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    There are many people who put in 70 or 80 work weeks and are barely putting enough food on the table for their families. That bootstraps crap and ivory tower nonsense has to end. As if Romney's failures weren't enough of a lesson. Not everybody can own yachts and mansions because they are kept down. The idea that "hard work" will make someone rich is completely false. Wealth is often inherited. And why is it in other western countries, like Japan, CEOs are paid much less then they are here? You don't need to work hard to make a lot of money. You just need to know the right people, be born in the right family and manipulate papers.

    Benvolio is completely mistaken in several different levels. The divide between the rich and poor in America becomes increasingly wider. And the idea that the poor "don't work hard enough" is ridiculous. Often people spend their whole lives working well pass retirement age... and people like Mitt Romney and other rich elitists can sit in country clubs with their millions.

    Raise the net worth of Americans by giving them a chance? Thanks for the total talking point. Sounds like a republican slogan. Nothing more than a slogan that has little basis in truth.

  7. #7

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    This is truly a lovely piece of propaganda. The thing I find fascinating is the "socialism" graphic. That is so untrue. The actual graphic for socialism is pretty much the same as the actual graph, or what they say is the actual graph for the distribution today. Socialism or capitalism has pretty much the same end result.....a very few have the greatest portion of wealth. We have to remember socialism is never for the socialists. It is only for everyone else. In socialism, the very wealthy get to keep their money just as they do in capitalism. The only marked difference is since socialism has to inevitably cannibalize itself, the margin for who gets to keep their money and who doesn't get to keep it has to keep moving.

    Presently I've already heard the line moving. A five years ago when the current president was first elected the "line" was 3 million dollars liquid. After, the healthcare debacle the "line" was moved to 10 million dollars liquid. Last year prior to the election the "line" had once more moved to 30 million dollars liquid. A few days after the election the "line" moved to 100 million dollars liquid. By liquid, most sources I've seen mean anything other than U.S. dollars, i.e. gold. O and by line I mean those that get to keep their money, hence the refusal to abridge the tax code.

    I mean it is well known almost all politicians are very wealthy. Most are millionaires. Very few aren't. Members of Congress already get their salary for life as a pension. They also aren't affected by the healthcare disaster. They are more interested in keeping their positions than anything else.

    I make a good living but I don't have that kind of money laying around the house. I did the next best thing. Right after the current president's first election, I bought property outside the U.S.
    Only government can take perfectly good paper, cover it with perfectly good ink and make the combination worthless.

  8. #8

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    I did not say the poor do not work hard enough. And I have often said that the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. That is because the people who do not have special education and talents have to compete with the hoards of poor immigrants, legal and illegal, coming into the country, willing to work cheap. That is the simple reason wages for the lower income groups cannot go up.
    But for many other groups, it is surprisingly easy to become moderately wealthy: 1,2, or 3 million or so. Professionals in medicine, law, real estate, securities, insurance, and lower level corporate executives can reasonably expect to save that much, including their IRAs and the like. Also in this level are people who start fairly small but successful businesses of their own, but it is getting harder as the government is decidedly the enemy of business.
    And a surprisingly large number become very wealthy, including people in entertainment and professional athletics; those with the ability to rise to higher levels in corporate management.
    And it is still possible to become very rich with a novel idea. The computer and internet billionaires prove this.
    BUT the reason the gap between the rich and poor is getting greater is because it is still possible for people with ability to get rich and very rich. But the poor are getting poorer, including most on salaries, because we keep getting more and more and more poor people. And frankly , the are supposed to be poor. That is literally their purpose and function. Ask any liberal. He will tell you we need millions of more immigrants because they will work dirt cheap for wages most Americans will not work for. When I said we should give Americans a chance, I of course meant we should stop the evil immigration which is keeping a large segment of society stuck at the bottom.
    But the title of this thread is wrong. The video is not about income. It is about wealth, which the accumulated savings from income. Some people have large salaries but little net wealth, because they spend it.
    Last edited by Benvolio; March 6th, 2013 at 05:10 PM.

  9. #9
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,924

    Code of Conduct
    How many times are you gonna sing that turbo offensive racist song before you realize nobody here wants to listen to it? Eventually it WILL get you perma-banned.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  10. #10
    GiancarloC
    Guest

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    people are supposed to be poor? What kind of elitist racist xenophobic crap is that?

  11. #11
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    63,363

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    This country is a plutocracy,simple as that. And the track record for plutocratic governments isn't good.

  12. #12

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by GiancarloC View Post
    people are supposed to be poor? What kind of elitist racist xenophobic crap is that?
    Read what I said. When liberals are asked why we should bring in millions of more poor immigrants, they always say, because we need them to work at dirt poor jobs which Americans don't want. So yes, their purpose and function is to be poor. Don't scream at me, I want to eliminate poverty.

  13. #13
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    Read what I said. When liberals are asked why we should bring in millions of more poor immigrants, they always say, because we need them to work at dirt poor jobs which Americans don't want. So yes, their purpose and function is to be poor. Don't scream at me, I want to eliminate poverty.
    Actually, the correct answer to that would be that liberals want to allow those immigrants a better chance at life than where they are coming from. If you ask a Republican that same question, that's when you get the answer of "I want them so I can have a good source of cheap labor." They are also the ones who'll pack up and move to another country if you do anything to try and get those poor people higher wages or better benefits.

  14. #14

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Actually, the correct answer to that would be that liberals want to allow those immigrants a better chance at life than where they are coming from. If you ask a Republican that same question, that's when you get the answer of "I want them so I can have a good source of cheap labor." They are also the ones who'll pack up and move to another country if you do anything to try and get those poor people higher wages or better benefits.
    That's wrong. We have debated it many times here, and the liberal answer is always that we need them to take the low jobs Americans don't want. Most Republicans would say we should limit the inflow.

  15. #15

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    How many times are you gonna sing that turbo offensive racist song before you realize nobody here wants to listen to it? Eventually it WILL get you perma-banned.
    The thread is about income equality. How could you talk about income equality without discussing the massive inflow at the bottom. You cannot discuss a boat filling with water without mentioning the hole in the bottom.

  16. #16
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    That's wrong. We have debated it many times here, and the liberal answer is always that we need them to take the low jobs Americans don't want. Most Republicans would say we should limit the inflow.
    No. Most liberals counter the claim by Republicans that say these immigrants are taking all of the jobs that Americans want with the claim that they mainly work low income jobs Americans don't want. However, most liberals believe that immigrants should be allowed in to escape persecution and/or have a shot at a better life. I wouldn't doubt most Republicans want them to stay out because they want a large, cheap labor force when they move their businesses to that country.

    I don't see how you are making a link between immigration and wealth/income distribution anyway. The current statistics put 40% of the wealth in the hands of less than 5% of the population. I can tell you right now the other 95% of the population are not comprised of a majority of immigrants. You also make the incorrect assumption that if you eliminated all of the immigrants in the country, that somehow the money would flow back down to the middle class. What would actually happen is that lower class would still remain poor, assuming that all of the poor non-immigrants rushed to fill those jobs the immigrants vacated and, at best, the wealth distribution would stay the same.

  17. #17

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    With a reduced labor force competing for jobs, wages would rise by the law of supply and demand. The reason the jobs pay so low is that there are too many immigrants willing to work that cheap.
    Liberals seldom try to rationalize immigration on the basis that immigrants just want a better life, because many millions of Americas want a better life, and should have a priority over foreigners. Hence they claim that immigrants take only low jobs Americans don't want.

  18. #18
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    The assumption that this is somehow unfair is wrong. It assumes for one thing that ours is a zero sum economy, that is, for someone to have less someone else must have more,and vice versa, and therefore, if the rich have more, they must have taken it from the poor. That was true in per-industrial economies, but not today. Bill Gates did not become rich by taking it from the poor. Oprah did not become rich by taking it from the poor. In a huge economy like ours, and the world, fortunes are often, probably most often made by a very small profit each from millions of people.
    A much more important point is that it is still possible--not even improbable--to become very wealthy in the US, and many of the wealthiest people did so in a short period of time with new innovation. All the fortunes made from the internet, for instance. The idea that we should confiscate from the rich because other are less rich, is dangerous, because it limits the incentive to innovate, build and create.
    It is also a mistake to focus on wealth as opposed to income, because it does not tell us much about relative comfort. A person making a hundred thousand a year, living fairly well in an apartment will often not have much net worth. A large percentage people would rather spend than save or invest. But the implication that all those with low "wealth" are living in poverty is a fallacy.
    My readers here, of course, will recognize the inherent hypocrisy of the liberal position on wealth. Any liberal will tell you that we have too many poor people, but then he will also say that we should not slow the importation of millions of additional poor people. ???
    If we want to raise the new worth of Americans let us give them a chance.
    lmao. Benvolio the single greatest indicator of future wealth is the socioeconomic class of your family at the time of your birth.

    In other words, economic upward mobility is largely myth, it's not primarily how rich people became rich, those are the exception by far and not the rule.

    Yes, this viewpoint you have that people who have a ton of money earned it, and overlooking the fact that the vast majority of people who can live off trusts and hedge funds and capital investments were born with that money, is ridiculous. But hey? when has fact ever stopped you before?

  19. #19

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Actually the vast majority of the rich did NOT inherit wealth.https://www.google.com/search?q=who+...iw=768&bih=928
    But what I said was that it is still possible, and not improbable, to become wealthy today and millions do it. The ability to leave it to future generations is an important incentive,part of the American dream.and the rich do nut cause others to be poor, they are the job creators. The reason the poor get poorer is because there are more and more and more of them of them.

  20. #20
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Beware the deepity.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    16,721
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    The assumption that this is somehow unfair is wrong. It assumes for one thing that ours is a zero sum economy, that is, for someone to have less someone else must have more,and vice versa, and therefore, if the rich have more, they must have taken it from the poor.
    You are correct. It is not a zero-sum game. That means the super-wealthy have nothing to lose by paying their staff much, much more.

    Because that's how a non-zero-sum-game works. You know that right. It works both ways. So if the top 1% triple the average salary at the companies they own, then everybody wins. Because it's not a zero-sum game.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  21. #21
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,924

    Code of Conduct
    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post

    You are correct. It is not a zero-sum game. That means the super-wealthy have nothing to lose by paying their staff much, much more.

    Because that's how a non-zero-sum-game works. You know that right. It works both ways. So if the top 1% triple the average salary at the companies they own, then everybody wins. Because it's not a zero-sum game.
    Haha suh-NAP!
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  22. #22

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    You are correct. It is not a zero-sum game. That means the super-wealthy have nothing to lose by paying their staff much, much more.

    Because that's how a non-zero-sum-game works. You know that right. It works both ways. So if the top 1% triple the average salary at the companies they own, then everybody wins. Because it's not a zero-sum game.
    Few if any companies, or their owners could survive a doubling of all salaries.

  23. #23
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,982
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    The real tragedy is that the majority of the income of the top one or two percent is not merely unearned, but is subsidized by the government. Unearned income is taxed at a lower rate than that paid by almost anyone else who actually pays federal income tax. When one sector pays a lower rate than another, that group is getting benefits that are paid for by those paying the higher rate -- so what's going on in the U.S. is that the middle and upper middle classes are working for the wealthy twice, once as their employees and again as what can only be called serfs.

    The only corrective is to have two things: a higher individual exemption, on the order of twice the federal poverty rate, and an absolute minimum tax rate, on the order of twenty percent, so that no matter what deductions or other dodges someone may grab, they still have to pay the minimum rate.


    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    You are correct. It is not a zero-sum game. That means the super-wealthy have nothing to lose by paying their staff much, much more.

    Because that's how a non-zero-sum-game works. You know that right. It works both ways. So if the top 1% triple the average salary at the companies they own, then everybody wins. Because it's not a zero-sum game.
    Bingo!

    Further, wealth in a modern economy is not determined by what's sitting in the bank as by the movement of money -- or, more precisely, the flux. Flux is the volume of something flowing in a given period of time (e.g. gallons per minute), so the faster money moves, and the more that is moving, the greater the flux. Flux also depends on the size of the area the substance is flowing through. In economic terms, then, the flux of money is greater when it is moving all across the income spectrum rather than focused in a narrow band.

    In other words, when income across the board is higher, everyone prospers more than when it flows primarily in one section. If the wealthy were to distribute half their income evenly across the rest of the population, the flux would increase and everyone would be more prosperous. Indeed this is amplified by another factor: unused capacity. When people have the need for more income just to satisfy the basics of living comfortably, they have unused capacity for spending, and that unused capacity means that potential income for everyone else is reduced. Unused capacity heavily impacts the flux, which means it heavily impacts prosperity.

    Consider it this way: if half the income of the wealthy were distributed as earnings across the lower half of the economic ladder, that income would immediately enter the economy as money in motion: it would purchase things, from lemon meringue pies to dental care, from ceiling paint to new carpeting; demand would thus increase, bringing more employment (resulting in higher wages), and in turn the rise in employment would further increase the flux, making a self-feeding process that would continue to raise the prosperity of everyone until the capacity for spending was maxed out. The wealthy themselves would benefit greatly, because the increased revenues to companies would raise the value of stocks -- in fact it is not unlikely that the result would be a sort of Laffer curve, where the wealthy would actually find their incomes rise higher than the income they previously surrendered to the workers.

    But income inequality restricts flux, resulting in lower prosperity for everyone -- even for those at the top. And that is why countries with vast income and wealth inequality fail economically (and then politically): they have shackled the flow -- the fluix -- of money so much that the stream does less and less work, with the result that those economies with a higher flux prevail.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  24. #24
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    With a reduced labor force competing for jobs, wages would rise by the law of supply and demand. The reason the jobs pay so low is that there are too many immigrants willing to work that cheap.
    Liberals seldom try to rationalize immigration on the basis that immigrants just want a better life, because many millions of Americas want a better life, and should have a priority over foreigners. Hence they claim that immigrants take only low jobs Americans don't want.
    Addressing your second point first, many Americans do want a better life. But a better life for an American is not necessarily the same as an immigrant wanting a better life. While a better life to an American might mean being able to buy a new car or buy a house instead of renting a cheap apartment, a better life for an immigrant may mean being able to hold a certain view without worrying about being imprisoned or killed by their government. This country also has a history of welcoming immigrants looking to better their life situation.

    Now to your first point. That is ridiculous thinking. Maybe if we did get rid of the immigrants and any American willing to work for a cheap wage and were able to drive up wages without driving the jobs out of the country to a cheaper place to work, the price of everything would just go up to make up for the additional wages the employers are paying out. Rich people don't give up wealth in order to benefit those below them. So what you would find is that you're now paying more for your fast food so they can pay those workers more. You will find yourself paying more for groceries so the people in the production line could be paid more. And as less-wealthy employers have to pay more for what they buy, they will be forced to up their prices to compensate for that.

    The fact is that saying immigrants are the problem is a red herring. Wealthy employers maximizing profit in order to maximize their personal wealth at the expense of those under them is the root cause of the ridiculously unbalanced wealth distribution in this country. An economic model based on greed and the race to the top among the wealthy elite is what keeps the scales heavily tipped in the rich's favor and will eventually lead to problems. Many failings of civilizations throughout history are caused by tremendous wealth inequities and too few people having too much control of the money.

  25. #25
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Beware the deepity.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    16,721
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Actually that chart shows "wealth." That's not really a good measure of relative standard of living, because it does not address how much of that wealth is truly available to be consumed.

    For example, take Bill Gates.

    He certainly experiences his wealth in the form of his rather large lakeside estate, and his art collection. But that only takes a pittance of the billion that are nominally accredited to his name, and that would place him in the top rung of that wealth distribution chart.

    But I contend most of that is sunk capital, that he can't really use except in name only. Say $40 billion represents microsoft shares. What does that actually do for him? Nothing. If he were stripped of those shares, and they were turned over to the employees or a trust fund or something, nothing in his lifestyle would change. He'd still have more paintings than he could ever look at, and more rooms in his house than he could ever vacuum himself, even if he lost 90% of his assets.

    The key message here is that even though those assets are in his name, he is not really the beneficiary. I contend his shareholdings do more for his employees than for him. All it represents is a place to go to work and earn a paycheque, and it doesn't really matter who owns those shares - they are not really the beneficiary.

    Imagine that Gates were forced to divest himself of most of his shares, and that they were granted to Microsoft employees in the name of "greater equity." No new wealth would be created; it would just be redistributed. And the newly wealthy employees would not experience any change in their well-being. They would be obliged to maintain their new wealth as sunk capital. They couldn't sell off the intellectual property to another company because then they would no longer be employable. They couldn't sell off the Microsoft campus because then there'd be no place to work. They'd be wealthy but no better off. Gates would be poorer but no worse off. So while I do believe wealth distribution is important, I don't think much would really change. If neither of us can sell it, why do I care whether you own the factory or I do? If you've got a better track record as a manager, I might be better off if you own it.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  26. #26

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Many conservatives argue that gross income and wealth inequality have negligible social and political impacts
    They are wrong.

    Richard Wilkinson, best known for his book The Spirit Level, outlines the consequences:


  27. #27
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Addressing your second point first, many Americans do want a better life. But a better life for an American is not necessarily the same as an immigrant wanting a better life. While a better life to an American might mean being able to buy a new car or buy a house instead of renting a cheap apartment, a better life for an immigrant may mean being able to hold a certain view without worrying about being imprisoned or killed by their government. This country also has a history of welcoming immigrants looking to better their life situation.

    Now to your first point. That is ridiculous thinking. Maybe if we did get rid of the immigrants and any American willing to work for a cheap wage and were able to drive up wages without driving the jobs out of the country to a cheaper place to work, the price of everything would just go up to make up for the additional wages the employers are paying out. Rich people don't give up wealth in order to benefit those below them. So what you would find is that you're now paying more for your fast food so they can pay those workers more. You will find yourself paying more for groceries so the people in the production line could be paid more. And as less-wealthy employers have to pay more for what they buy, they will be forced to up their prices to compensate for that.

    The fact is that saying immigrants are the problem is a red herring. Wealthy employers maximizing profit in order to maximize their personal wealth at the expense of those under them is the root cause of the ridiculously unbalanced wealth distribution in this country. An economic model based on greed and the race to the top among the wealthy elite is what keeps the scales heavily tipped in the rich's favor and will eventually lead to problems. Many failings of civilizations throughout history are caused by tremendous wealth inequities and too few people having too much control of the money.
    Agreed. I guess when big box retailers like Wal*Mart (and it was NOT limited to them, by any means) came up with informal schemes like finding pretexts to terminate minimum wage employees just before they would come up for review or a pay raise or corporate benefits/insurance, or reducing employees to under 40 hours a week to get around ever giving them any full time benefits regardless of how long they were with the company, Benvolio thinks that all of these people were illegal immigrants who were enabling this state of affairs and not, overwhelmingly, English-speaking American citizens working a crap job trying to get by.

  28. #28
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,982
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by EastMed View Post
    Many conservatives argue that gross income and wealth inequality have negligible social and political impacts
    They are wrong.

    Richard Wilkinson, best known for his book The Spirit Level, outlines the consequences:

    So it isn't the availability of guns that makes the U.S. more violent, it's social immobility and extreme wealth distribution.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  29. #29
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    So it isn't the availability of guns that makes the U.S. more violent, it's social immobility and extreme wealth distribution.
    Both play a role but certainly if no guns existed on the continent there'd be no gun deaths.

  30. #30

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    It has been my experience that those that complain about the disparity of wealth are those that not only do not have any wealth but also have no means of attaining said wealth, in other words losers. They are very akin to those spouting the proverbial..."money is the root of all evil." Both are usually uneducated religious zealots of one ilk or another. Wealth is not inherently evil. Attaining wealth is not inherently evil.

    I came from humble circumstances and have managed to make a very nice living. I make more than my dad ever thought of making. I had no government assistance. I had no assistance whatever really, other than family and in pretty meager ways. I worked my way through school. I worked really crappy jobs too. It took me longer but I made it through. It means more to me after having been through the ringer. I've never thought anyone owed me anything.

    I now find myself after having worked many years to make something for myself, being vilified for having what I do have. I worked for it. If others want the same things then I suggest they work for it as well.
    Only government can take perfectly good paper, cover it with perfectly good ink and make the combination worthless.

  31. #31

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    What you are both missing is that the reason WalMart and others can pay crap wages and get away with it is because there is a vast reservoir of unemployed and under employed people willing to work for such jobs. A few months ago the unemployed looking for work was at 14 million, not counting those who have given up looking, and another. They want a better life and should have a priority over those in other countries who want to come.
    Alas, liberals prefer the authoritarian answer. Lets allow million and millions to come in. Then let's use the law to pull down the successful half of the country and make sure they never get ahead again.

  32. #32
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    I came from humble circumstances and have managed to make a very nice living. I make more than my dad ever thought of making.
    This is the American Dream and it's dead. Once you adjust for inflation and the soaring costs of fuel, healthcare and education, the concept that anyone who works hard and applies themselves is going to do better than their parents is no longer true. They're typically doing worse. I mean, good for you with your anecdote at all. But the handwash of "anyone who tries soars to the top, everyone else is a loser" is just apologism for a very poor status quo that sees 80% of household incomes dwindling since the 70's.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    What you are both missing is that the reason WalMart and others can pay crap wages and get away with it is because there is a vast reservoir of unemployed and under employed people willing to work for such jobs. A few months ago the unemployed looking for work was at 14 million, not counting those who have given up looking, and another. They want a better life and should have a priority over those in other countries who want to come.
    Alas, liberals prefer the authoritarian answer. Lets allow million and millions to come in. Then let's use the law to pull down the successful half of the country and make sure they never get ahead again.
    Nonsense. Those jobs are largely being filled by Americans who don't have better options, and that isn't because immigrants have taken all the jobs above them. Far from. They pay these wages because they can, and because they have absolutely no interest in doing better.

  33. #33

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    This is the American Dream and it's dead. Once you adjust for inflation and the soaring costs of fuel, healthcare and education, the concept that anyone who works hard and applies themselves is going to do better than their parents is no longer true. They're typically doing worse. I mean, good for you with your anecdote at all. But the handwash of "anyone who tries soars to the top, everyone else is a loser" is just apologism for a very poor status quo that sees 80% of household incomes dwindling since the 70's.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Nonsense. Those jobs are largely being filled by Americans who don't have better options, and that isn't because immigrants have taken all the jobs above them. Far from. They pay these wages because they can, and because they have absolutely no interest in doing better.
    Yes, they pay low wages because they can. Because there are plenty of people's willing to work that cheap.and more coming in every day.

    You keep setting up straw men arguments. No one has said that mere hard work will give you more than yor Dad or that any one who tries soars. On the contrary I said that the immigrants willing to work dirt cheap pull down the wages of every one without special education or skill. People in lower levels without work, compete with the next higher.
    But people with profitable education and skills and many people with their own businesses can still do very well, and millions do.

  34. #34
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    Yes, they pay low wages because they can. Because there are plenty of people's willing to work that cheap.and more coming in every day.

    You keep setting up straw men arguments. No one has said that mere hard work will give you more than yor Dad or that any one who tries soars. On the contrary I said that the immigrants willing to work dirt cheap pull down the wages of every one without special education or skill. People in lower levels without work, compete with the next higher.
    But people with profitable education and skills and many people with their own businesses can still do very well, and millions do.
    And you completely ignored me saying that most of these jobs, easily the dominant majority, are being filled by American citizens..
    your argument makes no sense, and you keep repeating it over, and over, and over.

    Employers pay as little as they possibly can, that was true even 100 years ago, and the only thing that pushed ANYTHING otherwise were the evil, evil bad unions that fiscal conservatives denounce. It was never done because of "scarce labor" or anything else. And your position also ignores the demand created by immigrant population increases, which creates more jobs and produces more purchasing.

  35. #35

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    And you completely ignored me saying that most of these jobs, easily the dominant majority, are being filled by American citizens..
    your argument makes no sense, and you keep repeating it over, and over, and over.

    Employers pay as little as they possibly can, that was true even 100 years ago, and the only thing that pushed ANYTHING otherwise were the evil, evil bad unions that fiscal conservatives denounce. It was never done because of "scarce labor" or anything else. And your position also ignores the demand created by immigrant population increases, which creates more jobs and produces more purchasing.
    So what those 30 million or so foreign born doing? You claim they are not taking jobs. What are they doing and why do they keep coming? Sure, many committ crimes, but most do not.
    You are forgetting that low income people require services that others have to pay for. Healthcare at emergency rooms, education, jails, trash collection, roads, police and fire departments. All people cause environmental damage, create sewage, trash, emissions. In the balance, low income people do more harm than good.

  36. #36

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by xbuzzerx View Post
    This is the American Dream and it's dead. Once you adjust for inflation and the soaring costs of fuel, healthcare and education, the concept that anyone who works hard and applies themselves is going to do better than their parents is no longer true. They're typically doing worse. I mean, good for you with your anecdote at all. But the handwash of "anyone who tries soars to the top, everyone else is a loser" is just apologism for a very poor status quo that sees 80% of household incomes dwindling since the 70's.
    Everyone that tries has it better. They may not be the CEO of a Fortune 500 company but they will have it better. Some have it much better. Some have it much much better. If one does not try at all they will not have any measurable success. That is true irrespective of any circumstance.

    My first full-time job was $400 a month. My best friend and roommate was pretty much the same thing. So we had basically $800 a month for everything, rent, groceries, utilities, fuel costs, insurance, clothing, haircuts, uniforms, school books and supplies, and mad money. As I remember, I think we had around 40 bucks left after everything was paid at the end of the month. So basically we had 5% of our combined income left after everything was paid and was current. We were definitely from paycheck to paycheck.

    Ok the Bureau of Labor Statistics has the average median weekly income in the last month of 2012 at $772. That is $3088 a month. That is about 7.5 times what I was making. Now to make things fair multiply that by two and you get $6176 a month. I looked it up. The median price of gas back then was 59 cents per gallon. If you multiply it by the same rise in salary that would make gas $4.43 per gallon. We paid $150 a month for rent. Ok multiply that by the same number and you get $1125. I think just about anyone could get a nice place for that just about anywhere in the U.S. except maybe NYC or LA. If you use similar numbers I think just about anyone could live very comfortably on that income and have a nice 5% left which would be $308.

    My point is that the dream is only dead if people are not striving for it. I didn't own a new car until I was in my 30s. The problem nowadays is the "I want it now" attitude. There are no guarantees at birth. Well except one for the children born in this country which is a personal debt of about $1.5 million. That is if the kid is born today. That of course is incorrect because many of those kids will not pay anything towards the debt so the share for those actually working and paying taxes into the system is much much much higher.
    Only government can take perfectly good paper, cover it with perfectly good ink and make the combination worthless.

  37. #37
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    So what those 30 million or so foreign born doing? You claim they are not taking jobs. What are they doing and why do they keep coming? Sure, many committ crimes, but most do not.
    You are forgetting that low income people require services that others have to pay for. Healthcare at emergency rooms, education, jails, trash collection, roads, police and fire departments. All people cause environmental damage, create sewage, trash, emissions. In the balance, low income people do more harm than good.
    Listen carefully Benvolio. Whether immigrants come or go tomorrow and for the rest of this year, native born Americans competing for jobs being primarily filled by English-speaking Americans is not going to have its demand go up and down due to job competition. They may, however, see those numbers of jobs go down if you contrict the population and reduce the number of people buying products and participating in the economy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    Everyone that tries has it better.
    The stats don't bear this out. Household income has shrunk for 80% of households since 1970. Facts, please.

  38. #38
    GiancarloC
    Guest

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Benvolio View Post
    Read what I said. When liberals are asked why we should bring in millions of more poor immigrants, they always say, because we need them to work at dirt poor jobs which Americans don't want. So yes, their purpose and function is to be poor. Don't scream at me, I want to eliminate poverty.
    Read it... found nothing truthful in it. Keep on bashing immigrants... more of the same old xenophobia and racism that continues in this forum unabated. No... the republican and right winger wants to increase poverty. It suits their own interests better.

  39. #39
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Beware the deepity.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    16,721
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Benvolio, you still haven't educated yourself on the Lump of Labour Fallacy and it shows.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  40. #40
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    My point is that the dream is only dead if people are not striving for it. I didn't own a new car until I was in my 30s. The problem nowadays is the "I want it now" attitude. There are no guarantees at birth. Well except one for the children born in this country which is a personal debt of about $1.5 million. That is if the kid is born today. That of course is incorrect because many of those kids will not pay anything towards the debt so the share for those actually working and paying taxes into the system is much much much higher.
    This is total bullshit. First off, the American Dream isn't attainable for all who try for it. The American Dream is based on the inherent notion that there are people out there that you can be better than. If everyone attained the American Dream, then the goal posts would just move and the New American Dream would be born. There are people out there who just won't be able to make ends meet no matter how hard they try, and trying for them many times means making sacrifices they can't make (a single mom with two kids choosing to buy clothes, food, and shelter for her kids instead of paying to go to college to better herself.)

    There will always be a need for low-skill jobs, but that doesn't make those jobs any less valuable or those that work those jobs any less hardworking. Yes, anyone could do the job of a janitor, but not just anyone will do the job of that janitor. That janitor keeps the CEO and everyone under him from having to go to work in a dirty shit hole, but he isn't compensated proportionately to the value he provides. That is the real problem. The value of work should be determined by the benefit derived from it, not from the level of skill needed to perform it. People who are CEOs don't provide 200 times the benefit from their job performance as those below them.

    And I'm really sick of hearing how our children and children's children are going to be stuck with x amount of per person debt. The debt expands and contracts with the economy. A more vibrant economy where wealth is more evenly distributed instead of concentrated in the hands of a few will result in a reduced debt and deficit. Cutting spend on domestic programs while defending the practices of not expecting rich people to pay more into a system from which they have reaped grossly disproportional benefits is what causes an economy to remain stagnant or contract. Besides, I hear people talk about how much our children are going to be paying for the current debt, yet I see them fight tooth and nail against having to pay more towards it themselves. Hypocritical if you ask me.

  41. #41

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    This is total bullshit. First off, the American Dream isn't attainable for all who try for it. The American Dream is based on the inherent notion that there are people out there that you can be better than. If everyone attained the American Dream, then the goal posts would just move and the New American Dream would be born. There are people out there who just won't be able to make ends meet no matter how hard they try, and trying for them many times means making sacrifices they can't make (a single mom with two kids choosing to buy clothes, food, and shelter for her kids instead of paying to go to college to better herself.)

    There will always be a need for low-skill jobs, but that doesn't make those jobs any less valuable or those that work those jobs any less hardworking. Yes, anyone could do the job of a janitor, but not just anyone will do the job of that janitor. That janitor keeps the CEO and everyone under him from having to go to work in a dirty shit hole, but he isn't compensated proportionately to the value he provides. That is the real problem. The value of work should be determined by the benefit derived from it, not from the level of skill needed to perform it. People who are CEOs don't provide 200 times the benefit from their job performance as those below them.

    And I'm really sick of hearing how our children and children's children are going to be stuck with x amount of per person debt. The debt expands and contracts with the economy. A more vibrant economy where wealth is more evenly distributed instead of concentrated in the hands of a few will result in a reduced debt and deficit. Cutting spend on domestic programs while defending the practices of not expecting rich people to pay more into a system from which they have reaped grossly disproportional benefits is what causes an economy to remain stagnant or contract. Besides, I hear people talk about how much our children are going to be paying for the current debt, yet I see them fight tooth and nail against having to pay more towards it themselves. Hypocritical if you ask me.
    This tirade sounds like sour grapes to me. I worked my butt off to get where I am and to afford what I have.

    There is no equity in life. Where is that carved in stone? I'll tell you....nowhere. True there are people that are janitors and there are those that are CEOs. There are CEOs that have been janitors. There are janitors that will never be CEOs. That is just life.

    There are years of giveaway programs which have cost trillions of dollars taken from productive working people that prove one thing and one thing only. There is no program that can instill a sense of accomplishment or ambition.
    Only government can take perfectly good paper, cover it with perfectly good ink and make the combination worthless.

  42. #42
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    This tirade sounds like sour grapes to me. I worked my butt off to get where I am and to afford what I have.

    There is no equity in life. Where is that carved in stone? I'll tell you....nowhere. True there are people that are janitors and there are those that are CEOs. There are CEOs that have been janitors. There are janitors that will never be CEOs. That is just life.

    There are years of giveaway programs which have cost trillions of dollars taken from productive working people that prove one thing and one thing only. There is no program that can instill a sense of accomplishment or ambition.
    Then why were you spewing garbage two posts up about the American Dream myth saying that people who work hard do great in our society? Because now you've just thrown all of that in the trash and said "but who cares, life isn't fair."

  43. #43
    GiancarloC
    Guest

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    This tirade sounds like sour grapes to me. I worked my butt off to get where I am and to afford what I have.

    There is no equity in life. Where is that carved in stone? I'll tell you....nowhere. True there are people that are janitors and there are those that are CEOs. There are CEOs that have been janitors. There are janitors that will never be CEOs. That is just life.

    There are years of giveaway programs which have cost trillions of dollars taken from productive working people that prove one thing and one thing only. There is no program that can instill a sense of accomplishment or ambition.
    I guess some are more "entitled" to having success because of a biased system... there are plenty of people who works their butts off and they get screwed in the end by this system. Equity? Yeah, there are those given privilege over others unfairly. Same old garbage rhetoric. And insulting those who do work hard and accuse them of taking giveaways?

    Here we go with this bill o'reilly debunked bullshit. The rich are the ones taking the biggest handouts... they take tax cuts and big business subsidies. So lets get a fact check.

  44. #44
    PerScientiam AdJustitiam bankside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Beware the deepity.
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Married (to a man)
    Posts
    16,721
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    This tirade sounds like sour grapes to me. I worked my butt off to get where I am and to afford what I have.

    There is no equity in life. Where is that carved in stone? I'll tell you....nowhere. True there are people that are janitors and there are those that are CEOs. There are CEOs that have been janitors. There are janitors that will never be CEOs. That is just life.

    There are years of giveaway programs which have cost trillions of dollars taken from productive working people that prove one thing and one thing only. There is no program that can instill a sense of accomplishment or ambition.
    Your post is not internally coherent. You imply that there are two categories "productive working people" and those without a sense of "accomplishment or ambition," and that such is life. You also state that there is no equity, and that it's just life.

    If both were true, then people would wind up in those two categories somewhat randomly. But then you lose the ability to distinguish between the character of people who are productive, and people who lack ambition.
    Americans need to keep their guns so they can protect themselves from gun violence just like Nancy Lanza did. And like Chris Kyle did. And like Gabby Giffords did. And like Tom Clements did. And like Michael Piemonte. And Joseph Wilcox.

  45. #45
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    This tirade sounds like sour grapes to me. I worked my butt off to get where I am and to afford what I have.

    There is no equity in life. Where is that carved in stone? I'll tell you....nowhere. True there are people that are janitors and there are those that are CEOs. There are CEOs that have been janitors. There are janitors that will never be CEOs. That is just life.

    There are years of giveaway programs which have cost trillions of dollars taken from productive working people that prove one thing and one thing only. There is no program that can instill a sense of accomplishment or ambition.
    I make a very decent living as well and I'll tell you that I also worked my butt off to get there. But I will also tell you that it wasn't only MY work that got me to where I am. It was that fact I had 2 caring parents who motivated me to work hard and succeed. It was the fact that I was able to go to decent suburban K-12 public schools thanks to my county government and where I lived. It was the fact I was able to get in-state tuition and an in-state scholarship for the state university I went to because of my attendance and preparation at those suburban public schools. It is the fact that I was able to get a job with the federal government doing exactly what I majored in. These are all advantages I had along the way that some do not.

    In high school, I worked as a janitor at my school even though I didn't really need to and the people I worked with had a good work ethic and worked hard. Their station in life wasn't determined by their lack of drive or hard work. It was determined by external factors that they couldn't really control (their home life growing up, expenses of going to college, attending poor city schools, growing up in the south during the 60s and 70s, family health issues, etc.) I saw the struggles they had with their families, making ends meet, etc. These are the majority of those people who many label as just living off of the system. The same goes for the people I worked with driving city/university buses while in college. The same I see now working part-time in retail. These people aren't victims of not trying hard and slacking off. These are people who are victims of having a life in which attaining the qualifications for these "more important" jobs was almost impossible. These people work hard and provide a huge contribution to the people they serve. Why do they deserve less of the American Dream because their circumstances in life didn't afford them the opportunities that others get afforded; and that someone else who did get those advantages decides that although their contributions are needed and meaningful, they deserve minimum wage while those making the decisions are worth millions?

  46. #46

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    I make a very decent living as well and I'll tell you that I also worked my butt off to get there. But I will also tell you that it wasn't only MY work that got me to where I am. It was that fact I had 2 caring parents who motivated me to work hard and succeed. It was the fact that I was able to go to decent suburban K-12 public schools thanks to my county government and where I lived. It was the fact I was able to get in-state tuition and an in-state scholarship for the state university I went to because of my attendance and preparation at those suburban public schools. It is the fact that I was able to get a job with the federal government doing exactly what I majored in. These are all advantages I had along the way that some do not.

    In high school, I worked as a janitor at my school even though I didn't really need to and the people I worked with had a good work ethic and worked hard. Their station in life wasn't determined by their lack of drive or hard work. It was determined by external factors that they couldn't really control (their home life growing up, expenses of going to college, attending poor city schools, growing up in the south during the 60s and 70s, family health issues, etc.) I saw the struggles they had with their families, making ends meet, etc. These are the majority of those people who many label as just living off of the system. The same goes for the people I worked with driving city/university buses while in college. The same I see now working part-time in retail. These people aren't victims of not trying hard and slacking off. These are people who are victims of having a life in which attaining the qualifications for these "more important" jobs was almost impossible. These people work hard and provide a huge contribution to the people they serve. Why do they deserve less of the American Dream because their circumstances in life didn't afford them the opportunities that others get afforded; and that someone else who did get those advantages decides that although their contributions are needed and meaningful, they deserve minimum wage while those making the decisions are worth millions?
    O get it now. You suffer from white guilt. My personal opinion is that is somewhat mentally disordered. I do not suffer from such a thing.
    Only government can take perfectly good paper, cover it with perfectly good ink and make the combination worthless.

  47. #47
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    O get it now. You suffer from white guilt. My personal opinion is that is somewhat mentally disordered. I do not suffer from such a thing.
    White guilt? Are you serious? I suffer from understanding that other people have experiences and walks of life different than mine and that everyone deserves to make a decent living from whatever they do as long as they work hard at it. It's not a mental disorder. It's called being understanding and realizing I'm not the only person in the universe. You should try it some time.

  48. #48

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    Your post is not internally coherent. You imply that there are two categories "productive working people" and those without a sense of "accomplishment or ambition," and that such is life. You also state that there is no equity, and that it's just life.

    If both were true, then people would wind up in those two categories somewhat randomly. But then you lose the ability to distinguish between the character of people who are productive, and people who lack ambition.
    Life is random. What is your point?

    There are those born into difficult circumstances that are capable of lifting themselves out of said circumstances. There are those that cannot. Many burn through buckets of money they didn't earn. There are those born into very privileged circumstances that take a fortune and make a larger fortune. Then there are those that suffer from a myriad of problems...addictions, illness, poor business skills, poor choices of friends. Many lose buckets of money they didn't earn.
    Only government can take perfectly good paper, cover it with perfectly good ink and make the combination worthless.

  49. #49
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    Life is random. What is your point?

    There are those born into difficult circumstances that are capable of lifting themselves out of said circumstances. There are those that cannot. Many burn through buckets of money they didn't earn. There are those born into very privileged circumstances that take a fortune and make a larger fortune. Then there are those that suffer from a myriad of problems...addictions, illness, poor business skills, poor choices of friends. Many lose buckets of money they didn't earn.
    Life is random. So when the government shows up to randomly take more of your "hard earned" money to randomly give to others via social programs, you should sit back, relax, and realize that it is just your truth catching up to you, right?

  50. #50
    CE&P Secret Police xbuzzerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    10,752

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Income Inequality Flash Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Durango95 View Post
    O get it now. You suffer from white guilt. My personal opinion is that is somewhat mentally disordered. I do not suffer from such a thing.
    Did you just basically imply anyone doing well is white? Yes, yes I think you did.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.