Rich get richer

[JulieW]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

 

[Newtosilver]

How many times has the word socialist or socialism been used?

Bloody socialists, ok we can ignore anything in the thread because it is just socialists spreading lies again.

 

[col0016]

Serious question:
If we divided all the money equally now, do you think that in two generations everybody would still have the same amount?

If not, should we do resets every generation to punish those who save or invest and reward those who spend all their money?

 

[southerncross]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

ASK yourself Jules where the west would be without those you so disparage ? Where would the country be right now without progress, the exploitation of the mineral reserves, the industry that people like the above mentioned have created ? Your dogmatism is akin to the greens who would have us all living in grass hut's or caves.

Can you quote just one study such as you mention above....

 

[southerncross]

The super elite probably do many of the things that they are blamed for with regards macro-economics and political manipulation. It has been so for many centuries. The people in the palace on the hill determine the fate of the people in the fields.

The super-elite though do not make us sit there drinking every night posting on web forums about how we are their victims, they don't make us choose stupid friends, they don't make us watch the ABC or read the Telegraph, they don't make us drink methanol cocktails in Kuta or go to the gym and take steroids or to get a retarded tattoo or steal from our employer or have babies to claim welfare or to choose an Arts degree at university. In a country like Australia most people who are poor are there because of bad choices, not because of the Rothschilds. First World Problems.

Obviously there are rampant examples of exploitation around the world by the elite and large corporations to this day, particularly by oil and mining interests in poor countries, sweatshops in Asia and so on and so on. Clearly the banking empires hold unbridled power over capital flows and debt. I don't know how to deal with these huge things but I do know that I see people around me in Australia all the time that complain about being poor but who really should not be looking at someone else to be blame for that. Socialism will and never has worked because people are not equal and in a socialist or communist scenario the lazy are still lazy, the motivated are still motivated and the lazy will drift to the bottom. Equality comes from individual people choosing to be equal.

+1 Damn well said, wish I was as eloquent.

 

[Shaddam IV]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

You will go to your grave blaming someone else for all of your woes. Haunting web forums posting articles every day about how unfair everything is. First World Pastimes.

 

[errol43]

All I ask is a level playing field...No bail ins to help the super rich nor TPP that when introduced ensures corporate law overrules the rest.

If I make a mistake in my financial decisions, I will be declared bankrupt so let it be with Corporations.

Some men/women are not born into wealth. To them I salute but for others born into wealth, no salute is warranted.

RNT. Are you a speech writer for a political party?

Regard Errol 43

 

[JulieW]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

You will go to your grave blaming someone else for all of your woes. Haunting web forums posting articles every day about how unfair everything is. First World Pastimes.

And you'll go to yours blithely ignorant about your enslavement.

 

[boyd_05]

All I ask is a level playing field...No bail ins to help the super rich nor TPP that when introduced ensures corporate law overrules the rest.

If I make a mistake in my financial decisions, I will be declared bankrupt so let it be with Corporations.

Some men/women are not born into wealth. To them I salute but for others born into wealth, no salute is warranted.

RNT. Are you a speech writer for a political party?

Regard Errol 43

Yea a level playing field is what is needed but the problem is, it also works both ways. Some peoples idea of a level playing field is not very level at all but will use the equality angle to support their narrative.

Can u clarify why someone born into wealth by pure chance gets less respect from u than someone who wasn't? I see that as the same kind of mentality that allows some of the super wealthy to think they are automatically better than, or shouldn't respect someone born into poverty. No one gets to choose the circumstances in which they enter this world so judging them based on that doesn't make sense to me.

The measure of ones character should be based on their individual merits and how they treat other people and not how much money they do or don't have. I think if we are really going to establish a level playing field, this is the first thing society needs to work on.

 

[southerncross]

Your a bleeding heart Jules.
It is all there for the taking, not all want to, not all can but there is a minority that can and will. The result is that a single person can and will provide an income for many based on their own desires. It is not the fault of those that can, it is just that they did. If they did not the masses you seem to care so much about would be left where they began. As a result though they gained and some prospered.
Take a look at the Chinese in Aus, the Turk's, the Vietnamese, some prospered some didn't , Aus is despite your depiction an equal playing field and it comes down to hard work.

 

[JulieW]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

ASK yourself Jules where the west would be without those you so disparage ? Where would the country be right now without progress, the exploitation of the mineral reserves, the industry that people like the above mentioned have created ? Your dogmatism is akin to the greens who would have us all living in grass hut's or caves.

Can you quote just one study such as you mention above....

Depends on the world you want to live in doesn't it?

We'll either have emperors and be feudal again, or we'll live in the sort of socialist paradise of Australia and all be in the top 10% and let the rest of the world do as it will until the planet can no longer support the model, and then none of it will matter at all.

 

[errol43]

All I ask is a level playing field...No bail ins to help the super rich nor TPP that when introduced ensures corporate law overrules the rest.

If I make a mistake in my financial decisions, I will be declared bankrupt so let it be with Corporations.

Some men/women are not born into wealth. To them I salute but for others born into wealth, no salute is warranted.

RNT. Are you a speech writer for a political party?

Regard Errol 43

Yea a level playing field is what is needed but the problem is, it also works both ways. Some peoples idea of a level playing field is not very level at all but will use the equality angle to support their narrative.

Can u clarify why someone born into wealth by pure chance gets less respect from u than someone who wasn't? I see that as the same kind of mentality that allows some of the super wealthy to think they are automatically better than, or shouldn't respect someone born into poverty. No one gets to choose the circumstances in which they enter this world so judging them based on that doesn't make sense to me.

The measure of ones character should be based on their individual merits and how they treat other people and not how much money they do or don't have. I think if we are really going to establish a level playing field, this is the first thing society needs to work on.

Respect? I think it is a far harder road from poverty to riches than from riches to riches. The hardest thing when you are born into riches is no to fall into the trap of easy come easy go.
Regards Errol 43

 

[boyd_05]

All I ask is a level playing field...No bail ins to help the super rich nor TPP that when introduced ensures corporate law overrules the rest.

If I make a mistake in my financial decisions, I will be declared bankrupt so let it be with Corporations.

Some men/women are not born into wealth. To them I salute but for others born into wealth, no salute is warranted.

RNT. Are you a speech writer for a political party?

Regard Errol 43

Yea a level playing field is what is needed but the problem is, it also works both ways. Some peoples idea of a level playing field is not very level at all but will use the equality angle to support their narrative.

Can u clarify why someone born into wealth by pure chance gets less respect from u than someone who wasn't? I see that as the same kind of mentality that allows some of the super wealthy to think they are automatically better than, or shouldn't respect someone born into poverty. No one gets to choose the circumstances in which they enter this world so judging them based on that doesn't make sense to me.

The measure of ones character should be based on their individual merits and how they treat other people and not how much money they do or don't have. I think if we are really going to establish a level playing field, this is the first thing society needs to work on.

Respect? I think it is a far harder road from poverty to riches than from riches to riches. The hardest thing when you are born into riches is no to fall into the trap of easy come easy go.
Regards Errol 43

Yes it is harder no doubt but thats not the point i was making. U completely missed it.

 

[southerncross]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

ASK yourself Jules where the west would be without those you so disparage ? Where would the country be right now without progress, the exploitation of the mineral reserves, the industry that people like the above mentioned have created ? Your dogmatism is akin to the greens who would have us all living in grass hut's or caves.

Can you quote just one study such as you mention above....

Depends on the world you want to live in doesn't it?

We'll either have emperors and be feudal again, or we'll live in the sort of socialist paradise of Australia and all be in the top 10% and let the rest of the world do as it will until the planet can no longer support the model, and then none of it will matter at all.

That answer is a tad nonsensical Jules, You posit a Malthusian future without any basis . Still waiting on on any peer reviewed study as mentioned.

 

[JulieW]

Just google southerncross. I'm sure you'll find a lot of research on the matter that you'll disagree with.

Here's one to get you started.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/t...-20-are-85-times-richer-than-the-poorest-20-1

p.s there's also research that shows wealth inequality is pretty much a downward effect on GNP as well so if you're looking for chances for people to increase their personal wealth, that starts to disappear with wealth inequality as well.

I don't really have anything more, or anything nice to say about it actually.

 

[Ouch]

Here are the Inclusive Capitalists' demands from what I can gather :

We believe the most effective activities in which the private sector can engage are, first, improving "education for employment"; second, doing a better job of supporting small- and medium-sized businesses; and third, making sure companies are managed and governed for the long termall in a context of working to encourage the adoption of basic ethical norms in all businesses for the overall health of capitalism

The 3 demands are discussed in further depth in source below:
https://www.google.com.au/url?q=htt...1se8bA&usg=AFQjCNEAs22YKLw2YUIVilKZwWq9AX0zmA

And a cynical view on what Inclusive Capitalism's real motives are:
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...global-revolt-henry-jackson-society-pr-growth

 

[Newtosilver]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

Julie, you go girl, you are part of a very, very small minority on this forum (you would be labelled a socialist here) but let's face it the majority of the people on this forum would be considered a very small element of people in Australian society.

Wealth or lack of it is not a reflection of hard work, often is it is a reflection of how willing you are to screw other people over, where you were born or who your parents are.

 

[systematic]

The rich don't get richer by hard work as we understand it. It takes a silver tongue, a lawyer, financial advisor and a crooked accountant. Stamp out corruption, take a hard line against white collar crime and the rich will fall apart ....

 

[Shaddam IV]

The rich don't get richer by hard work as we understand it. It takes a silver tongue, a lawyer, financial advisor and a crooked accountant. Stamp out corruption, take a hard line against white collar crime and the rich will fall apart ....

Pretty insulting to all of those who became rich through hard work while others whined about how unfair everything is.

 

[Shaddam IV]

That those 1% own more than the other 99% is simply obscene. It is all about a rigged system that crushes people underfoot, and convinces the victims that they should be happy with the system because, if they were smarter or worked harder, then they could have got out of the way.

They have their wealth because they've exploited the world and their fellows without penalty or consequence. At the time of the industrial revolution, wealth was seen as a virtue because it enabled one to do good works. I don't see the good works created by Kerry Packer blowing 34 million dollars on the tables at Ladbrokes, or wealthy sheiks buying gold toilets for their private planes.

Every study shows that the greater the wealth disparity the more likely the society to rip apart. That's what is coming. The 'trickle down' effect that people like Dimon, Buffett, Rhinehart et al quote, is simply not true. They're getting theirs and yours, yes, even the fair share of those of you cheering them on.

As George Carlin so succinctly put it: 'It's a club, and you're not in it'.

You will go to your grave blaming someone else for all of your woes. Haunting web forums posting articles every day about how unfair everything is. First World Pastimes.

And you'll go to yours blithely ignorant about your enslavement.

I am just glad that I don't live in the kind of world that you promote. You have a very dark and fearful view of reality. You call me ignorant of enslavement but you are a professional victim.