Originally Posted by
JPF
You’re saying income inequality is a “national emergency”. Clearly, there will always be inequality when it comes to wealth.
I’m simply asking, since you insist it’s a national emergency, what degree of inequality is tolerable? The CEO making 23X what his employees made…is that acceptable to you? What if today’s CEO only made 46 times (twice the 1950/1960 rate)? Would that be tolerable?
As for losing control of the government? We elected every person in elected office today. We have full control of the government or at least those who staff it.
One of the things I dislike the most about these forums is that they are filled with children who cannot think through a topic with any form of common sense. If you had read the article I posed with any form of comprehension you would have noticed that the Founders considered income inequality to be "evil" in the words of Madison. To prevent that "evil" the Founders supported legal remedies to moderate income accumulation, or as Madison said "the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigents towards a state of comfort."
In any event, your comprehension of what is occurring is extremely limited. We have hyper-partisanship supported by lobbiests, and other forms of propaganda, in a country where less then 50% of the population bothers to vote, and a President who was elected by a small group of electors who did not represent the average person, or even a majority of the population.
Now, go learn what mediocrity is, or profit sharing, and any number of issues the Founders supported as could be applicable to today.
"2Timothy 3 "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away"
Bookmarks