The wealthy are a burden

[wiseones2cents]

what is your solution wiseone? end all wealth? i don't get your position.

Simple. Remove the middle man. The wealthy can live wealthy but when their money runs out that is it. No more working off our backs. I support socialism at least in my sense of the word, not the form of socialism that is spread by pro-capitalists.

Do what most of these countries are doing. Nationalizing the resources/economy. Most people that are super wealthy believe it or not, attained it in some unlawful way. So dont feel bad when their gravy train is derailed.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

The people that work long hours DO earn their wealth. The people that make money doing nothing(Capitalists) DONT!

Athletes, Actors, Musicians bring in a ton of revenue and thus deserve to be payed well, but I think they are overpayed also.

I was listening to Johnny Depp and he was saying he has more then enough money to live, everything else he makes is for his kids.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Simple. Remove the middle man. The wealthy can live wealthy but when their money runs out that is it. No more working off our backs. I support socialism at least in my sense of the word, not the form of socialism that is spread by pro-capitalists.

Do what most of these countries are doing. Nationalizing the resources. Most people that are super wealthy believe it or not, attained it in some unlawful way. So dont feel bad when their gravy train is derailed.

perhaps i missed certain parts of this thread, but what is your definition of the middle man? and what is your definition of socialism?

i don't believe, today, most people who are wealthy (or super) attained that wealth vis a vis illegal activity. that was most likely the case a hundred years ago, that at least some illegal activity took place, however, today with the stock market and real estate market, i don't believe that holds true.

 

[wiseones2cents]

no, because that is not what you said earlier. i'll take this as a backpeddle clarification to a position that i believe you have no clue what you're talking about.

tell why you believe "many" do not work?

Think of it more as clarifying my position rather then back peddling. There are super rich and there are rich. The super rich do not work. They hire people to do their work. The rich people work.

Why do I believe many dont work?lol Simply because they dont have to! They dont need money. They have large bank accounts. Would you work if you were a multi millionaire?lol I'd be traveling, going to dinners, fishing, basically anything I wanted to do.

You could be able to do this with the interest and investments you earn alone.

 

[wiseones2cents]

capitalists don't work? where do you that notion? did you make that up?

Do you think wealthy shareholders work? I know many and they dont work a single bit!

the very same thing can be said about rich people who don't "work". they bring in "a ton of revenue" but somehow you believe that revenue is bad because they don't sing, throw a ball or act. seriously...wtf.

They bring a ton of revenue or does the MIDDLE CLASS(VIA CONSUMERISM AND TAXES) bring a ton of revenue they leech from?

your point?

My point is that they are overpayed.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Think of it more as clarifying my position rather then back peddling. There are super rich and there are rich. The super rich do not work. They hire people to do their work. The rich people work.

Why do I believe many dont work?lol Simply because they dont have to! They dont need money. They have large bank accounts. Would you work if you were a multi millionaire?lol I'd be traveling, going to dinners, fishing, basically anything I wanted to do.

You could be able to do this with the interest and investments you earn alone.

you might be right, but i don't think it is "most". money gets diluted through generations as many uber wealthy learned (primarily in the couple of hundred years) and so now, they continue to work to make their wealth grow. if you look at the forbes 400 list, i don't think you can claim "most" don't work.

i also believe, that you are defining "work" in your own language. i know a few wealthy people (at least 10 mill) and they work. if you talking billions, then i say take a hard look at how those people live before you claim that don't work. gates, buffet....trump....

just as with some poor or middle class folks, there are those in the wealthy class who are slouches. stop trying to demonize one group solely based on their wealth.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

2028]Do you think wealthy shareholders work? I know many and they dont work a single bit!

i think we need to establish what you consider wealthy.

They bring a ton of revenue or does the MIDDLE CLASS(VIA CONSUMERISM AND TAXES) bring a ton of revenue they leech from?

you're kidding. how do you think musicians, athletes and actors make their money? because the MIDDLE CLASS VIA CONSUMERISM supports them.

My point is that they are overpayed.

fair enough....what should studios cap actors, athletes, musicians salaries at? don't forget - a johnny depp film can make a half billion dollars and he is a primary factor in it. should his salary be capped, and the studio get the rest?

 

[wiseones2cents]

perhaps i missed certain parts of this thread, but what is your definition of the middle man? and what is your definition of socialism?

i don't believe, today, most people who are wealthy (or super) attained that wealth vis a vis illegal activity. that was most likely the case a hundred years ago, that at least some illegal activity took place, however, today with the stock market and real estate market, i don't believe that holds true.

A middle man is capitalism. When the product gets to the bottom consumer? It is usually 10X the cost. For example. If something is worth $1? He sells it to a middle man that agrees to buy lets say 1,000,000 for $2, but the guy that can afford only 500,000? The supplier might refuse and tell him to go through the guy that bought the million. So he buys it off that guy(middleman) for $4, then comes along a guy that can only afford 10, 000, well he buys it off that middleman for $6, then he has to put his profit on it, and sell it from $8-$10 dollars, depending on how much the buyer can get away with. Therefore now you have 5 middle men eating at the pig trough, when in a socialist economy, the consumer could buy directly from the source for $1, now has to pay $10. Now do the math on every product being bought. That is alot of money the capitalists are robbing, doing nothing more then holding onto product.

Actually I asked all the people I know and they all admitted, that most if not all, did something unlawful to attain their wealth. Yes, back in the day it was bad(crimes were more difficult to prove) but no-where near as bad as it is today because there are more people eating at the pig troughs and more money and ways to steal it. And they know the law and the loopholes to keep them out of jail......Heck if there is a law that may incriminate them, they just get congress to amend that law.

 

[wiseones2cents]

the wealthy own everything? good lord, you don't know any small business owners do you? what about government jobs?

you're clueless

They say 2% o the world own more then 50% of the globes entire wealth(and rising rapidly). They say 1% of America owns almost 50% of America's total wealth and they rose 10% in the last 10 years. Do you have any idea how much wealth that is in a short period of time? I would Imagine that the top 10% also own another very large chunck of the pie(Maybe 25% or more). I can get actual numbers if you like. I think I read 75% of the population owns less than 10% of the wealth.

Small business? They come and go(bankruptcy). And most are operating under debt. Government jobs? What do government workers own? A house? Some a cottage?

You are clueless. I have the numbers to back what I say.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

iseones2cents;942032]A middle man is capitalism. When the product gets to the bottom consumer? It is usually 10X the cost. For example. If something is worth $1? He sells it to a middle man that agrees to buy lets say 1,000,000 for $2, but the guy that can afford only 500,000? The supplier might refuse and tell him to go through the guy that bought the million. So he buys it off that guy(middleman) for $4, then comes along a guy that can only afford 10, 000, well he buys it off that middleman for $6, then he has to put his profit on it, and sell it from $8-$10 dollars, depending on how much the buyer can get away with. Therefore now you have 5 middle men eating at the pig trough, when in a socialist economy, the consumer could buy directly from the source for $1, now has to pay $10. Now do the math on every product being bought. That is alot of money the capitalists are robbing, doing nothing more then holding onto product.

ok...so you're a costco believer. a wholeseller all the way. what you fail to realize is, that the "middleman" exists in all forms of government, even socialism. it is impossible for every buyer to connect directly with every seller. thus, the middleman is born. if the middle man makes no profit, why bother? some sellers simply cannot or do not want to ship to certain locations, again, the middleman is necessary. take out the middleman and you have a very small economy, perhaps 5000 people or less. you really should read up on economics and the history of economics.

take someone on an outer pacific island who needs something from another island. they can't afford to go to the island to buy the product, because the transportation costs would be prohibitive. enter the "middleman" who engages in transport and so goes to the other island, buys wholesale, and then for his costs, charges you, the consumer, less money for the product than if you picked it up yourself, because he was able to purchase the product in bulk or simply because he had other business there.

your ideas seem to not take into account basic notions of trade. you seem to believe that if someone makes a product 5000 miles away, that the product should cost the same to someone located one mile away.

Actually I asked all the people I know and they all admitted, that most if not all, did something unlawful to attain their wealth. Yes, back in the day it was bad(crimes were more difficult to prove) but no-where near as bad as it is today because there are more people eating at the pig troughs and more money and ways to steal it. And they know the law and the loopholes to keep them out of jail......Heck if there is a law that may incriminate them, they just get congress to amend that law.

ok....your opinion vs. mine. however, still waiting for your definition of socialism.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

They say 2% o the world own more then 50% of the globes entire wealth(and rising rapidly). They say 1% of America owns almost 50% of America's total wealth and they rose 10% in the last 10 years. Do you have any idea how much wealth that is in a short period of time? I would Imagine that the top 10% also own another very large chunck of the pie(Maybe 25% or more). I can get actual numbers if you like. I think I read 75% of the population owns less than 10% of the wealth.

Small business? They come and go(bankruptcy). And most are operating under debt. Government jobs? What do government workers own? A house? Some a cottage?

You are clueless. I have the numbers to back what I say.

yes, i would like to see the numbers.

 

[wiseones2cents]

you might be right, but i don't think it is "most". money gets diluted through generations as many uber wealthy learned (primarily in the couple of hundred years) and so now, they continue to work to make their wealth grow. if you look at the forbes 400 list, i don't think you can claim "most" don't work.

i also believe, that you are defining "work" in your own language. i know a few wealthy people (at least 10 mill) and they work. if you talking billions, then i say take a hard look at how those people live before you claim that don't work. gates, buffet....trump....

just as with some poor or middle class folks, there are those in the wealthy class who are slouches. stop trying to demonize one group solely based on their wealth.

What do you mean wealth is diluted? The wealthy usually remain wealthy. People with "old money" have a lot of influence. Today there are more and more over night millionaires because there is a ton of pillaging. Though they are more likely to lose their wealth, since they are not used to being wealthy.

They don't work, work! They just have meetings once in awhile and give orders! If they are working it usually means they are a front man and a silent partner is running the show!

Sorry but your silly notion that people that are super wealthy work is laughable. Again. Would you work if you were a multi-millionaire? I'm talking cash not assets.

 

[wiseones2cents]

ok...so you're a costco believer. a wholeseller all the way. what you fail to realize is, that the "middleman" exists in all forms of government, even socialism. it is impossible for every buyer to connect directly with every seller. thus, the middleman is born. if the middle man makes no profit, why bother? some sellers simply cannot or do not want to ship to certain locations, again, the middleman is necessary. take out the middleman and you have a very small economy, perhaps 5000 people or less. you really should read up on economics and the history of economics.

take someone on an outer pacific island who needs something from another island. they can't afford to go to the island to buy the product, because the transportation costs would be prohibitive. enter the "middleman" who engages in transport and so goes to the other island, buys wholesale, and then for his costs, charges you, the consumer, less money for the product than if you picked it up yourself, because he was able to purchase the product in bulk or simply because he had other business there.

your ideas seem to not take into account basic notions of trade. you seem to believe that if someone makes a product 5000 miles away, that the product should cost the same to someone located one mile away.

LOL Where are the middle men in socialism. Even if there are SOME, no where near as much as capitalism. Actually if you notice, with all the mergers? people are startiung to buy more and more directly from the supplier. That is why small businesses are going bankrupt. I am fine with that. But it is not the government that is taking over. It is the 1%. We will soon, if not already, have an oligarchy ruling us. This is not my type of socialism. That is more communism. Where the ruling party and their cronies(you can constitute as middle men) rule supreme.

Middle men are NEVER necessary, they are an added tax. basically they are the nobles and the corporations are the Monarchs. I know enough about economics and the history and evolution of an economy.

Um when governments are allowed to make their own currency? There will not be much they cannot afford.

I understand adding things like logistics cost. it is separate from a middleman's cost. When logistics is private rather then government owned, it is just another pig eating at the pig troughs. And the owner of the trucking company adds his cost to become wealthy. remove the middleman and the price becomes much cheaper. There may be less work, but we will find something else for them to do. Where they actually earn their money.

My definition of socialism allows for home ownership, allows for over achievers to excel in the work place, allows democratic elections, ect...

 

[SmarterthanYou]

You don't get it do you. The wealthy own everything. Where ever you go it is the same. You make it sound like it is so easy to find another job or one with more pay. You are another dreamer that is oblivious to reality.

i'm a multi talented individual. I can find a new job just about anywhere if I need to. seems like you might have an education or training issue.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Congress. Now who does congress work for? The Lobbyists. And who do the lobbyists represent? You are so naive.

oh yeah, naive. how the hell have I made it in my 45 years of life......./sarcasm.

dude, seriously. you and dune are barking up the wrong tree. the world does not and never will work the way you want it to.

 

[The Dude]

The Beatles reinforce my belief that we are slaves to the wealthy.

Ya the Beatles EARNED their wealth. Maybe the musicians don't deserve millions of dollars but they deserve to be paid well(at least the ones with a huge following).

There is no Irony. Apples and oranges.

So someone with a GED like you should deside what someone deserves to earn. What a hippy loser.
It's like Clint said in unforgiven. deserves got nothing to do with it. junior

 

[The Dude]

Dumb2cents is poor and lives where only criminals are rich. Ok he lacks education and a spine.
Dumb2cents, 80 percent of millionaires are first generation rich.
So your dad was in gay porn, no rule you have to whine like a bitch forever. Your a bigger fag than poet.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

What do you mean wealth is diluted? The wealthy usually remain wealthy. People with "old money" have a lot of influence. Today there are more and more over night millionaires because there is a ton of pillaging. Though they are more likely to lose their wealth, since they are not used to being wealthy.

They don't work, work! They just have meetings once in awhile and give orders! If they are working it usually means they are a front man and a silent partner is running the show!

Sorry but your silly notion that people that are super wealthy work is laughable. Again. Would you work if you were a multi-millionaire? I'm talking cash not assets.

yes i would. and again, what is your definition of work?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

]LOL Where are the middle men in socialism. Even if there are SOME, no where near as much as capitalism.

wiseone...this says alot about your beliefs. you don't even know how middleman plays a role in a socialist economy. again...explain to me how goods reach others thousands of miles away. that would foster our discussion.

Actually if you notice, with all the mergers? people are startiung to buy more and more directly from the supplier. That is why small businesses are going bankrupt. I am fine with that. But it is not the government that is taking over. It is the 1%. We will soon, if not already, have an oligarchy ruling us. This is not my type of socialism. That is more communism. Where the ruling party and their cronies(you can constitute as middle men) rule supreme.

mergers have little to do with getting rid of the middle man. that said.... do you want a government controlling all the economy?

Middle men are NEVER necessary, they are an added tax. basically they are the nobles and the corporations are the Monarchs. I know enough about economics and the history and evolution of an economy.

then explain to me my south pacific island economy. explain how that would work, without a middleman. if they are never necessary, explain the transportation of goods over long distances.

Um when governments are allowed to make their own currency? There will not be much they cannot afford.

you and i pretty much agree on this. as long as the government can keep printing money AND keep the value of the money at tradeable rate, then i'm not sure this statement holds true. all one has to do is look at which governments keep printing money and which governments keep the value of money.

I understand adding things like logistics cost. it is separate from a middleman's cost. When logistics is private rather then government owned, it is just another pig eating at the pig troughs. And the owner of the trucking company adds his cost to become wealthy. remove the middleman and the price becomes much cheaper. There may be less work, but we will find something else for them to do. Where they actually earn their money.

wait a minute...so if the government is the middleman, you're ok with that? the government does not eat at your proverbial trough? you are truly naive and seriously need to study history.

i don't understand how you can remove the trucker and then the price becomes cheaper. the trucker makes the price cheaper. that is a fact. undeniable fact.

My definition of socialism allows for home ownership, allows for over achievers to excel in the work place, allows democratic elections, ect...

that is a broad definition that doesn't really define what you believe. for example, GWB believed in all of your listed ideals. is GWB your leader?

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

The Beatles reinforce my belief that we are slaves to the wealthy.

Ya the Beatles EARNED their wealth. Maybe the musicians don't deserve millions of dollars but they deserve to be paid well(at least the ones with a huge following).

There is no Irony. Apples and oranges.

So the Beatles 'earned' their wealth, but the guys who produced, edited, promoted, and distributed their music, didn't 'earn' their wealth? Even though without all that the Beatles wouldn't have been successful? And you don't think a band that (shitty as it is) has millions of fans shouldn't be able to set the price for the fruits of their labor?

Care to explain the massive incongruities here?