The ever widening gap between the rich and poor

[stmichael]

A new study by Oxfam found that the richest 1% of the world's population will own 50% of the planet’s wealth by the year 2016! It shows the ever widening gap between the rich and the poor in capitalist countries. This contradiction is prevented from exploding through the following means: 1) an abundant technical capacity that is spent in the production and distribution of waste, planned obsolescence, environmental destruction, military products, space junk, cheap gadgets, low-cost technology, and affordable luxury goods that are spread to the broad strata of the Earth’s population, thereby increasing the overall standard of living but at the same time concealing the radical inequality and anarchy at the heart of the capitalist system; 2) the concentration and expansion of the police and military state to protect and preserve the rich as well as an anarchic obsolete capitalist system is accomplished through the monopolization and mobilization of economic, political, and technological power, which is combined with a high degree of governmental intervention in the economy and in the private spheres of human life; 3) the passivity and indifference of the masses is further achieved through the scientific manipulation of private and group behavior, both at work and at leisure, including consciousness and the unconscious, for political and economic purposes by a massive propaganda machine that works day and night in support of the capitalist system (i.e., Internet, TV, news media, mass advertising for the latest and fastest gadgets and technology, satellite radio, Hollywood movies, constant political lies and manipulation, the spread of the so-called "terror" threat, atheist diversion from the class struggle, etc, etc,).

FOR MORE:

https://storify.com/deltoidmachine/how-we-won-the-james-randi-dollar-1-000-000-parano


"THE POET IS JUST THE MOUTHPIECE OF THE GODS" - Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human (1878)

 

[Keith&Co.]

Seems more like an issue for a government forum.

 

[DBT]

''The ever widening gap between the rich and poor ''

I wonder how far this is going to go before something gives. Incredible that inequity and exploitation has gone this far.

 

[gmbteach]

Are we headed back to the old Feudal System of the Rich Aristocracy with all the money and with the peasants doing all the work and having to work for them?

 

[DBT]

Are we headed back to the old Feudal System of the Rich Aristocracy with all the money and with the peasants doing all the work and having to work for them?

That's how it's looking....at a pay rate that's moving toward the bottom. Universal minimum wage for everyone except key employees.

 

[gmbteach]

Are we headed back to the old Feudal System of the Rich Aristocracy with all the money and with the peasants doing all the work and having to work for them?

That's how it's looking....at a pay rate that's moving toward the bottom. Universal minimum wage for everyone except key employees.

Which is bringing back the upper class wealthy, middle class comfortable and lower class peasants that are poorly paid - if at all.

 

[Atheos]

*** Mod Note

*** Thread moved from General Religion to Political Discussions

 

[fast]

Sounds like one of them is doing something right. I suppose that means the difference between doing things right and doing the right things is more important than ever.

 

[stmichael]

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84503534&x-yt-ts=1421914688&v=gW7607YiBso[/YOUTUBE]
CATCHING THE BIG FISH!


See how he always tries to make believers look like IDIOTS! He is TOO SMART FOR HIS OWN GOOD! However, Reason gave rise to Atheism so it cannot be defeated by Reason.

Stronger methods are needed:

 

[NobleSavage]

I'm waiting for the non-liberal response. There has to be something up at Heritage Foundation or Cato that says the opposite. Are there any CBO numbers? How are the median income earners doing when adjusted for inflation? Do the few super rich outliers skew the data? Do the super poor skew the data? Do we have an agreed upon definition of middle class? How fluid is the super rich compared to times past. It seems easier to move from poor to middle class in Europe, but what about moving from middle class to upper class? The fact that we tax capital gains much lower than wages seems silly, but is the result better for everyone as it encourages investment? Jason, Max, Deric, Loren what do you guys think?

 

[arkirk]

I'm waiting for the non-liberal response. There has to be something up at Heritage Foundation or Cato that says the opposite. Are there any CBO numbers? How are the median income earners doing when adjusted for inflation? Do the few super rich outliers skew the data? Do the super poor skew the data? Do we have an agreed upon definition of middle class? How fluid is the super rich compared to times past. It seems easier to move from poor to middle class in Europe, but what about moving from middle class to upper class? The fact that we tax capital gains much lower than wages seems silly, but is the result better for everyone as it encourages investment? Jason, Max, Deric, Loren what do you guys think?

There appears to be a little problem with the math here....it is the math that keeps the casinos open...predatory capitalism. The wealth transfers in one direction ten or more times as much in the other direction. If you own the roulette wheel and casino you win. It really isn't rocket science, you know...just cheap tricks polished for several centuries and culminating is what we have today...a polluted broken down world with a massive disadvantaged under class and the neo-royalty offering 401K's.

This has been about the most wildly divergent and off track thread I believe I have ever seen here...but fun just the same.

 

[Canard DuJour]

There has to be something up at Heritage Foundation or Cato that says the opposite.

Heritage and Cato ..pfft.

It'd mean about as much as the Kochs telling ordinary Americans there's no inequality issue.

In fact, hang on a minute...

 

[arkirk]

There has to be something up at Heritage Foundation or Cato that says the opposite.

Heritage and Cato ..pfft.

It'd mean about as much as the Kochs telling ordinary Americans there's no inequality issue.

In fact, hang on a minute...

That's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Those boys don't waste their breath talking to ordinary Americans. That's what they buy the politicians for.

 

[SimpleDon]

I'm waiting for the non-liberal response. There has to be something up at Heritage Foundation or Cato that says the opposite. Are there any CBO numbers? How are the median income earners doing when adjusted for inflation? Do the few super rich outliers skew the data? Do the super poor skew the data? Do we have an agreed upon definition of middle class? How fluid is the super rich compared to times past. It seems easier to move from poor to middle class in Europe, but what about moving from middle class to upper class? The fact that we tax capital gains much lower than wages seems silly, but is the result better for everyone as it encourages investment? Jason, Max, Deric, Loren what do you guys think?

The response that I have read from the conservative economists like Greg Mankiw, is that the economy has moved toward rewarding education and away from rewarding labor. That this is somehow an unavoidable, organic change in the economy, a change that no one can do anything about.

This is odd because thirty five years ago conservative economists were convinced that government economic policies were determining the split of the nation's income between profits and wages. That we had to change government policies to increase profits and to decrease wages, in order to increase income inequity and to provide more money for investments. The government economic policies were changed and income inequity has increased dramatically but investment in production facilities, real investment in business, has decreased.

What has increased is instability in the financial markets as this money diverted from wages has built one asset bubble after another to only see them collapse, in the stock market, the home mortgage market and the latest one to burst, in oil prices in the derivative commodities market. As the cash rich wealthy chase returns in Wall Street's various zero sum casinos.

 

[arkirk]

I'm waiting for the non-liberal response. There has to be something up at Heritage Foundation or Cato that says the opposite. Are there any CBO numbers? How are the median income earners doing when adjusted for inflation? Do the few super rich outliers skew the data? Do the super poor skew the data? Do we have an agreed upon definition of middle class? How fluid is the super rich compared to times past. It seems easier to move from poor to middle class in Europe, but what about moving from middle class to upper class? The fact that we tax capital gains much lower than wages seems silly, but is the result better for everyone as it encourages investment? Jason, Max, Deric, Loren what do you guys think?

The response that I have read from the conservative economists like Greg Mankiw, is that the economy has moved toward rewarding education and away from rewarding labor. That this is somehow an unavoidable, organic change in the economy, a change that no one can do anything about.

This is odd because thirty five years ago conservative economists were convinced that government economic policies were determining the split of the nation's income between profits and wages. That we had to change government policies to increase profits and to decrease wages, in order to increase income inequity and to provide more money for investments. The government economic policies were changed and income inequity has increased dramatically but investment in production facilities, real investment in business, has decreased.

What has increased is instability in the financial markets as this money diverted from wages has built one asset bubble after another to only see them collapse, in the stock market, the home mortgage market and the latest one to burst, in oil prices in the derivative commodities market. As the cash rich wealthy chase returns in Wall Street's various zero sum casinos.

A secular socialist approach to this problem would be to move SOCIETY toward education and away from working too hard. Your use of the word labor in the highlighted section actually is indicative not of labor but of people. The economy has moved toward those who can afford to get educated and away from the common man. It has assigned the profits to those who do not have to labor...only invest. So as time passes a greater and greater portion of society feels they ought to be in the non labor class and take a portion of their pitiable paychecks and blow them at the 401K casino. They often get an unepected "education" in this way. I believe capitalism is not corrupted. It is corruption.

 

[Axulus]

I'm waiting for the non-liberal response. There has to be something up at Heritage Foundation or Cato that says the opposite. Are there any CBO numbers? How are the median income earners doing when adjusted for inflation? Do the few super rich outliers skew the data? Do the super poor skew the data? Do we have an agreed upon definition of middle class? How fluid is the super rich compared to times past. It seems easier to move from poor to middle class in Europe, but what about moving from middle class to upper class? The fact that we tax capital gains much lower than wages seems silly, but is the result better for everyone as it encourages investment? Jason, Max, Deric, Loren what do you guys think?

The response that I have read from the conservative economists like Greg Mankiw, is that the economy has moved toward rewarding education and away from rewarding labor. That this is somehow an unavoidable, organic change in the economy, a change that no one can do anything about.

This is odd because thirty five years ago conservative economists were convinced that government economic policies were determining the split of the nation's income between profits and wages. That we had to change government policies to increase profits and to decrease wages, in order to increase income inequity and to provide more money for investments. The government economic policies were changed and income inequity has increased dramatically but investment in production facilities, real investment in business, has decreased.

What has increased is instability in the financial markets as this money diverted from wages has built one asset bubble after another to only see them collapse, in the stock market, the home mortgage market and the latest one to burst, in oil prices in the derivative commodities market. As the cash rich wealthy chase returns in Wall Street's various zero sum casinos.

Zero sum? You don't seem to understand the basics. The new wealth added by our additional ability to pump more barrels of oil, which the billions in capital investments made possible, is not zero sum.

 

[lpetrich]

The response that I have read from the conservative economists like Greg Mankiw, is that the economy has moved toward rewarding education and away from rewarding labor. That this is somehow an unavoidable, organic change in the economy, a change that no one can do anything about.

Almost like some great nonhuman force.

This is odd because thirty five years ago conservative economists were convinced that government economic policies were determining the split of the nation's income between profits and wages. That we had to change government policies to increase profits and to decrease wages, in order to increase income inequity and to provide more money for investments.

Any documentation of that?

Seems to me that the economic elite was using that as a pretext for getting more of the earnings of their businesses.

The government economic policies were changed and income inequity has increased dramatically but investment in production facilities, real investment in business, has decreased.

What has increased is instability in the financial markets as this money diverted from wages has built one asset bubble after another to only see them collapse, in the stock market, the home mortgage market and the latest one to burst, in oil prices in the derivative commodities market. As the cash rich wealthy chase returns in Wall Street's various zero sum casinos.

While those economists and their successors don't seem the least bit bothered by all these unintended consequences of their policies.

 

[TV and credit cards]

''The ever widening gap between the rich and poor ''

I wonder how far this is going to go before something gives. Incredible that inequity and exploitation has gone this far.

I don't think it's incredible at all and that we have a long way to go before something gives. The herd is still for the most part comfortable, fed, and warm. Now factor in the policing component. As things slowly get worse, 'they' slowly tighten up on physically restraining the herd. Of course, we, for the most part, will not be overly concerned with this tightening as it will all be done in the name of security.

Are we headed back to the old Feudal System of the Rich Aristocracy with all the money and with the peasants doing all the work and having to work for them?

[He says sarcastically]
Oh, it's not so bad. look here, this dude explains to the herd how the good folks at Davos are concerning themselves with those on the lowest rung (or in this case, the last snowball). But what else is he telling us? That the rest of us can take heart. We are so far and away from your "old Feudal System of the Rich Aristocracy". We should be grateful that we are not part of that last snowball. Nay, that our snowball even exists. So, thank the Masters of the Universe.

[video]http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30927354[/video]

 

[TV and credit cards]

The response that I have read from the conservative economists like Greg Mankiw, is that the economy has moved toward rewarding education and away from rewarding labor. That this is somehow an unavoidable, organic change in the economy, a change that no one can do anything about.

This is odd because thirty five years ago conservative economists were convinced that government economic policies were determining the split of the nation's income between profits and wages. That we had to change government policies to increase profits and to decrease wages, in order to increase income inequity and to provide more money for investments. The government economic policies were changed and income inequity has increased dramatically but investment in production facilities, real investment in business, has decreased.

What has increased is instability in the financial markets as this money diverted from wages has built one asset bubble after another to only see them collapse, in the stock market, the home mortgage market and the latest one to burst, in oil prices in the derivative commodities market. As the cash rich wealthy chase returns in Wall Street's various zero sum casinos.

A secular socialist approach to this problem would be to move SOCIETY toward education and away from working too hard. Your use of the word labor in the highlighted section actually is indicative not of labor but of people. The economy has moved toward those who can afford to get educated and away from the common man.

An interesting aspect of this is to invent the technology necessary to take away the good paying jobs, not the more laborious ones. I think the medical community is a good example of this. Pharmacists and Anesthesiologists will be the first to go. These are high paying jobs and those who profit from the field will attack these jobs with a vengeance. I think about Pharmacists and wonder why they exist today.

It has assigned the profits to those who do not have to labor...only invest. So as time passes a greater and greater portion of society feels they ought to be in the non labor class and take a portion of their pitiable paychecks and blow them at the 401K casino. They often get an unepected "education" in this way. I believe capitalism is not corrupted. It is corruption.

And they want to throw Social Security in the market. Shameful. For the average dude, the market is the school of hard knocks in that you learn by loosing your money and it is one hard lesson after another. I think the only game left for the average dude worth playing is being a landlord.

 

[Trodon]

''The ever widening gap between the rich and poor ''

I wonder how far this is going to go before something gives. Incredible that inequity and exploitation has gone this far.

There are economic issues and social issues. In the United States most lower income white men lean to the left on economic issues. They want the rich to be taxed more heavily. They oppose cuts in middle class entitlements. Nevertheless, they vote Republican because for them social issues are more important. In particular, they do not trust the Democrats on racial issues.