Wealth Distribution

[Keunert]

The US is quite a bit ahead in this regard to Switzerland, but we do have the same tendencies and it worries me quite a bit:

[GDS_Starfury]

well, my day was a lot happier before I watched that.

[Keunert]

do you want to know how often i have sex? you will be happy again. sex distribution is probably even worse than wealth distribution

[GDS_Starfury]

just pm me your address and we'll FedEx Gus to you right away.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

What was the condition when the French had their revolution? What about Russia, the prior to USSR Russia?

[Keunert]

i am not that desperate, thanks

[Steelgrave]

That's the most depressing thing I think I've seen in quite awhile  :-\

[LongBlade]

What's wrong with wealth inequality?

Why should wealth be redistributed? On what basis should it be redistributed?

What scares me is that there is a huge number of people who want to take money from one party and give it to another solely based upon their perception of fairness. I thought that system died with the USSR.

[GDS_Starfury]

its not the actual money that needs to redistributed.  its the ability and stability to make more money that needs to come into play.  even when I had the money to put into the stock market I was scared to due to black magic rule and regulations.  as well as I did playing the real estate game I got torpedoed by bank inflexibility.  the game itself isnt geared to the non-wealthy / non-corporate entity.

[LongBlade]

its not the actual money that needs to redistributed.  its the ability and stability to make more money that needs to come into play.  even when I had the money to put into the stock market I was scared to due to black magic rule and regulations.  as well as I did playing the real estate game I got torpedoed by bank inflexibility.  the game itself isnt geared to the non-wealthy / non-corporate entity.

I agree that we should have a level playing field for opportunity.

[Steelgrave]

There's inequality and then there's inequality. I've always been against forced wealth redistribution where the government takes from one party to put into the pockets of another party in exchange for their voter loyalty, aka Obamacare. But that doesn't mean the sheer scale of the wealth distribution (and more importantly the rate at which the inequality has grown) is something we should ignore. I don't think the clip does anything more than present the issue in a visual fashion. Whether we choose to ignore it or not is up to each of us individually, as it should be. But I think it will be addressed one way or the other, especially as the middle class disappears in this country.

[Steelgrave]

its not the actual money that needs to redistributed.  its the ability and stability to make more money that needs to come into play.  even when I had the money to put into the stock market I was scared to due to black magic rule and regulations.  as well as I did playing the real estate game I got torpedoed by bank inflexibility.  the game itself isnt geared to the non-wealthy / non-corporate entity.

Exactly!

[LongBlade]

There's inequality and then there's inequality. I've always been against forced wealth redistribution where the government takes from one party to put into the pockets of another party in exchange for their voter loyalty, aka Obamacare. But that doesn't mean the sheer scale of the wealth distribution (and more importantly the rate at which the inequality has grown) is something we should ignore. I don't think the clip does anything more than present the issue in a visual fashion. Whether we choose to ignore it or not is up to each of us individually, as it should be. But I think it will be addressed one way or the other, especially as the middle class disappears in this country.

Found a graphic for ya.

[Steelgrave]

^You know....you're talking to a guy who has voted in every single Federal election in his life and has never even once voted for a Democrat for President. I don't feel the need to get into the "more Republican than thou" argument. Suffice it to say that if one side had all the answers we should have seen it when the Republicans held the entire government during the first two years of Bush II. Instead they spent money like drunken Democrat sailors. Even now I'm hearing damn few original ideals from either side, all we hear is how terrible the other guys are.

You don't have to acknowledge we have a problem and I'm not smart enough to suggest a solution. Besides, as historians we should know that these things have a way of working themselves out over time. Unfortunately that is usually via popular uprising or a totalitarian change in government. Somehow I don't find either of those choices to be superior to us actually holding our government accountable and working on the problem.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I think we deserve better than converting it into a partisan football for lack of another argument. Or saying that corporate executives deserve to run all countries (being multi-national) is a useless position.

Executives give themselves massive benefits because they have the power to do so. If you choose to be their slave for the crumbs off the table that is your problem. If the government lets companies become big enough to threaten the state's economy that becomes everyone's problem. Only a fool or a bought politician would let it happen. I suspect far more politicians are bought than fools.