Members banned from this thread: AssHatZombie, SmarterthanYou, USFREEDOM911, Havana Moon, PostmodernProphet, Legion, Truth Detector, Granule, I Love America, Boris The Animal, Teflon Don, Dark Soul, Irish, CFM, Ralph, Sailor, Life is Golden, Bigdog, TTQ64, Getin the ring, zymurgy, Superfreak, PraiseKek, Grumpy, katzgar, countryboy, Tommatthews, volsrock, The Ugly Truth, BodyDouble, coolzone, rhym3pays, LV426, Loving91390, Into the Night, Enlightened One, Anarchon and Arminius


Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 79

Thread: Money Truly Doesn't Buy Happiness - World's Richest Man Bezos Is Getting A Divorce...

  1. #46 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    51,156
    Thanks
    3,173
    Thanked 14,758 Times in 10,237 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 572 Times in 539 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello cawacko,



    I understand the current relationship between employers and workers. I understand how Bezos has maximized his leverage on that. And he has done a marvelous job of creating a very profitable organization. Doing that took the work of everybody at Amazon. But their only incentive to work hard is nothing more than fear of losing their meager fixed income. Bezos has them over a barrel and he exploits that. They will work for very little compared to the value their work generates, Bezos pockets the difference. I believe he should share more of the results of that work with the ones whose labor generated it.

    Back in the 60's executives earned 10-15 times the average worker. Now it's like 600 times. And it's headed even higher.

    That's ridiculous. At some point we have to look at the big picture and see how efficient capitalism has become at exploitation.

    Capitalism is a powerful engine of wealth. But it cannot be allowed to run free and wide open. It would destroy the market, destroy society. Like any engine, if allowed to run at full speed it will blow up. It requires regulation. That is government's job. I believe government is not doing it's job here. I believe there should be established a maximum ratio of executive take vs average worker take. If allowed to continue to rise it leads to a run-away situation where the limit is extreme wealth inequality. Completely inefficient. With most wealth in just a few hands, market activity slows down because people don't have much wealth to trade for things.

    Extreme wealth inequality is a danger that pro-capitalists refuse to acknowledge. We are headed there. Economists are hitting alarm bells. Capitalists are as busy looking the other way as their were in 2008.
    One can work for the government if they want close to 100% job security. Otherwise nothing is gauranteed. Amazon is having to fight to get workers in some parts of their company.

    Bezos isn’t pocketing the extra. He’s the wealthiest man in the world because Amazons stock is off the charts. Expectations for growth are sky high. (His salary is $81K)

  2. #47 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,788
    Thanks
    2,946
    Thanked 3,063 Times in 2,005 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 306 Times in 280 Posts

    Default

    Wealth lust and extreme capitalism have become so efficient at wealth extraction that Americans no longer feel comfortable having large families. When people are not worried about wealth, they have more babies. But when people are concerned about being able to afford a home, a life and retirement, they don't believe they can afford large families. Americans are now having so few children that the birth rate is not enough to sustain the population.

    "By CNN; Nick Viviani |
    Posted: Fri 10:20 AM, Jan 11, 2019

    WASHINGTON (CNN) — Americans are having fewer children. One report says the number of births was so low in 2017 that it wasn't enough to keep the population levels steady.

    The National Center for Health Statistics released its report Thursday. The study finds that overall, the total fertility rate is 16% below what is considered the level needed for the population to replace itself."

    US Birth Rate Too Low To Sustain Population

    This is the result of extreme wealth inequality.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Flame on me, mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you go on my PERMANENT Ignore List. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I won't participate in your threads, you will be banned from mine. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: if you like my PIP, feel free to use it. It works well.

  3. #48 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    26,072
    Thanks
    5,197
    Thanked 7,186 Times in 5,372 Posts
    Groans
    15
    Groaned 1,187 Times in 1,140 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TOP View Post
    ...and? Landlords should work with their otherwise dependable tenants....
    (...this is the Dems problem now....this could be over with one 30 minute meeting.... BUT they choose hate for one person over the well being of so many of their constituents...let them reach out and help *until they're done pouting....)‘
    Keep repeating the lie, lemming

  4. #49 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,788
    Thanks
    2,946
    Thanked 3,063 Times in 2,005 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 306 Times in 280 Posts

    Default

    If capitalism was really working overall, Americans would be having enough babies to at least sustain the population level.

    So much wealth extraction has taken place that people don't feel like they can afford babies.

    Capitalism has extracted so much of the wealth of so many people that it is sucking the very life right out of the country.

    All to make a few people incredibly rich.

    Is that the real point of the USA? To make a few people really rich, and to cause the rest to feel like they can't even afford a family?

    We all know about the millennials who are living in parent's basements, can't afford to pay off student loans, much less have their own home.

    Kind of hard to build a family when you are homeless.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Flame on me, mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you go on my PERMANENT Ignore List. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I won't participate in your threads, you will be banned from mine. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: if you like my PIP, feel free to use it. It works well.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to PoliTalker For This Post:

    iolo (01-12-2019)

  6. #50 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cymru/'Wales'
    Posts
    7,461
    Thanks
    3,728
    Thanked 3,235 Times in 2,240 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 647 Times in 610 Posts

    Default

    One way or another the crazy system will destroy the species, and quite soon by the look of things.

  7. #51 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    51,156
    Thanks
    3,173
    Thanked 14,758 Times in 10,237 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 572 Times in 539 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iolo View Post
    One way or another the crazy system will destroy the species, and quite soon by the look of things.
    To be clear, capitalism = crazy system correct?

  8. #52 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cymru/'Wales'
    Posts
    7,461
    Thanks
    3,728
    Thanked 3,235 Times in 2,240 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 647 Times in 610 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    To be clear, capitalism = crazy system correct?
    Yup. Outdated by a hundred years now. Without it, we could all have prosperity.

  9. #53 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    51,156
    Thanks
    3,173
    Thanked 14,758 Times in 10,237 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 572 Times in 539 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iolo View Post
    Yup. Outdated by a hundred years now. Without it, we could all have prosperity.
    I think you’re on to something. Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Pol Pot et al just weren’t doing it right. How can we get someone such as yourself who would do it right as a leader on the world stage?

  10. #54 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cymru/'Wales'
    Posts
    7,461
    Thanks
    3,728
    Thanked 3,235 Times in 2,240 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 647 Times in 610 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    I think you’re on to something. Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Pol Pot et al just weren’t doing it right. How can we get someone such as yourself who would do it right as a leader on the world stage?
    I wouldn't have fuhrers, for a start. Socialism is to be achieved by the world's working class, not the state capitalist bosses, you list as programmed. Heil McCarthy and Death to Truth!

  11. #55 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,788
    Thanks
    2,946
    Thanked 3,063 Times in 2,005 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 306 Times in 280 Posts

    Default

    Good morning cawacko,

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    To be clear, capitalism = crazy system correct?
    We've actually known this for a long time. That's why we don't have pure unbridled capitalism. We know we have to regulate it and mix it with the right amount of socialism. And that optimal balance keeps changing. The more drastic capitalism becomes, the more wealth sequestered out of circulation, the greater the need for more socialism.

    Ultimately, capitalism will almost completely implode. Maybe Marx was right. As wealth inequality becomes more and more extreme, and most cannot support themselves, after most jobs are replaced by super-expensive AI robots which are owned by the rich for the purpose of eliminating labor costs and workers, capitalism will implode. When work doesn't support people or families (already happening,) there won't be enough customers for products. Consumerism will diminish and fade. Revenue will be insufficient to support the government (hint: that has already happened.)

    Conservatives won't want to admit this. They are really good at fooling themselves. They will continue to believe the lie that they think there is a spending problem. They will claim we just have to cut taxes for the rich even more. They will find that won't work. Tax cutting will not improve consumerism. The economy will go into recession and then depression unless wealth is redistributed.

    It is amazing how conservative fool themselves. They cut revenue, the debt went up, and they tell themselves we have a spending problem. Amazing.

    Clearly it is a lack of revenue problem. And it is going to get so much worse that no amount of tax cutting will fix it.

    We will be forced to vote them out and listen to Democrats. We are going to have to get more serious about Promoting the General Welfare.

    Because promoting the exclusive elite welfare is destroying us.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Flame on me, mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you go on my PERMANENT Ignore List. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I won't participate in your threads, you will be banned from mine. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: if you like my PIP, feel free to use it. It works well.

  12. #56 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    51,156
    Thanks
    3,173
    Thanked 14,758 Times in 10,237 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 572 Times in 539 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iolo View Post
    I wouldn't have fuhrers, for a start. Socialism is to be achieved by the world's working class, not the state capitalist bosses, you list as programmed. Heil McCarthy and Death to Truth!
    Would there be a President or singular “leader” of any sort? Would there be elections or do they impede the path to socialism?

  13. #57 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cymru/'Wales'
    Posts
    7,461
    Thanks
    3,728
    Thanked 3,235 Times in 2,240 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 647 Times in 610 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Would there be a President or singular “leader” of any sort? Would there be elections or do they impede the path to socialism?
    How the hell do I know: I leave crystal balls to fragile Americans, but certainly it is bound to be a matter of democratic agreement between humans . Do you know any?

  14. #58 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    51,156
    Thanks
    3,173
    Thanked 14,758 Times in 10,237 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 572 Times in 539 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iolo View Post
    How the hell do I know: I leave crystal balls to fragile Americans, but certainly it is bound to be a matter of democratic agreement between humans . Do you know any?
    How the hell would you know what your vision looks like? Yeah, silly me for asking

  15. #59 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    51,156
    Thanks
    3,173
    Thanked 14,758 Times in 10,237 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 572 Times in 539 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Good morning cawacko,



    We've actually known this for a long time. That's why we don't have pure unbridled capitalism. We know we have to regulate it and mix it with the right amount of socialism. And that optimal balance keeps changing. The more drastic capitalism becomes, the more wealth sequestered out of circulation, the greater the need for more socialism.

    Ultimately, capitalism will almost completely implode. Maybe Marx was right. As wealth inequality becomes more and more extreme, and most cannot support themselves, after most jobs are replaced by super-expensive AI robots which are owned by the rich for the purpose of eliminating labor costs and workers, capitalism will implode. When work doesn't support people or families (already happening,) there won't be enough customers for products. Consumerism will diminish and fade. Revenue will be insufficient to support the government (hint: that has already happened.)

    Conservatives won't want to admit this. They are really good at fooling themselves. They will continue to believe the lie that they think there is a spending problem. They will claim we just have to cut taxes for the rich even more. They will find that won't work. Tax cutting will not improve consumerism. The economy will go into recession and then depression unless wealth is redistributed.

    It is amazing how conservative fool themselves. They cut revenue, the debt went up, and they tell themselves we have a spending problem. Amazing.

    Clearly it is a lack of revenue problem. And it is going to get so much worse that no amount of tax cutting will fix it.

    We will be forced to vote them out and listen to Democrats. We are going to have to get more serious about Promoting the General Welfare.

    Because promoting the exclusive elite welfare is destroying us.
    We don’t have unfettered capitalism or anything close. That is a massive straw man. And since you brought up conservatives are you with iolo that we shouldn’t have a president and somehow a workers parsdie of socialism will magically appear? Is that the liberal position now?

  16. #60 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cymru/'Wales'
    Posts
    7,461
    Thanks
    3,728
    Thanked 3,235 Times in 2,240 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 647 Times in 610 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    How the hell would you know what your vision looks like? Yeah, silly me for asking
    It's not my vision, kid. If the species is to survive at all (which I very much doubt it will) working people will have to take the dangerous toys away from your idiot masters. It's as simple as that.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to iolo For This Post:

    PoliTalker (01-12-2019)

Similar Threads

  1. Richest 1% now owns half the world's wealth
    By Bill in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-19-2017, 05:41 AM
  2. World's richest woman says poor should have less fun, work harder
    By Havana Moon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 09-05-2012, 07:49 PM
  3. World’s richest woman suggests $2 a day wages for Australian miners
    By ZappasGuitar in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-05-2012, 05:24 PM
  4. Americans make up half of the world's richest 1%
    By RockX in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-06-2012, 09:34 AM
  5. Mexican tycoon overtakes Bill Gates as world's richest man
    By uscitizen in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-05-2007, 10:15 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •