What can be done about the rich? The wage disparity is at an all time high. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Rich people are also elitist and stuck up as fuck.

File: 29 KB, 400x600, 48366850.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:32:58 2015 No.915064 [Reply] [Original]

What can be done about the rich? The wage disparity is at an all time high. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Rich people are also elitist and stuck up as fuck.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:34:29 2015 No.915065 File: 191 KB, 809x1200, Bait-881789884-large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>915064

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:39:15 2015 No.915072

>>915064
>Rich people are also elitist and stuck up as fuck.
Well no shit. After you spend your youth raising a business off the ground and then every lazy fuck chips in on how you should spend your money (give it to them), you think you wouldn't be?

Good bait, 3/10.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:40:15 2015 No.915074 >>915072 I am not talking about the ones who work hard and come from nothing, but the ones who merely won the genetic lottery.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:42:15 2015 No.915076 >>915074 Well it may not be as hard for them to grow their money, but you have to remember somebody down the line worked hard for that shit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:45:33 2015 No.915081 >>915064 >rick the poet warrior kek

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:48:14 2015 No.915084 >>915064 >capital assets grow faster than wages What do you fucking think nigger? Put your money to work.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:50:03 2015 No.915086 >>915084 So you are admitting that we are in a pyramid scheme?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:51:06 2015 No.915090 Can someone explain to me why people care so much about the rich. I hear about the 1% all the time. Who gives a flying fuck. Is everyone jealous?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:51:50 2015 No.915091 File: 381 KB, 500x500, 1443649549165.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>915065 >>915072 >>915076 >>915084 >You just gotta pull yourself up by your bootstraps! >Everyone in the world can become a billionaire! You just aren't trying hard enough!

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:52:15 2015 No.915092 >>915064 >>915074 >>915086 This mentality is precisely why you will never get rich in your lifetime. I see your net worth maxing out at $20k if you are lucky.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 20:53:43 2015 No.915093 >>915090 Pretty much, people that have no knowledge of the economy or the financial markets sit around protesting wall street because it is evil for some arbitrary reason.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:01:15 2015 No.915101

>>915093
There's nothing more pathetic than a just barely middle class "I've got mine" cuck defending the rich simply because they see themselves as 'not poor', and thus, better than everyone else.

These people are primarily the reason nothing will change and we'll drive the economy into the ground before it's too late.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:02:22 2015 No.915103 >>915074 >I am not talking about the ones who work hard and come from nothing, but the ones who merely won the genetic lottery. Those are much rarer than you think

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:04:08 2015 No.915107

>>915076
>somebody down the line worked hard for that shit.
Or lucked out. You think the now-billionaire creator of Snapchat got here because of his hard work and business savvy? No. He put as much work as all the other thousands of app developers out there who make little to nothing in return.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:05:09 2015 No.915111 >Country A starts killing all of its rich people (be it literally or financially) >rich people from country A fuck off to Country B >Country A is now poorer than it originally was >Country B is suddenly now more powerful Smart move

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:06:35 2015 No.915114 >>915064 It's poor people's faults for throwing their money away and women for fucking up a perfectly good economic and social system

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:13:59 2015 No.915126

Let me break it down for you:
1. Eliminate payroll taxes and roll them up into the regular income tax
2. Socialize medicine
3. Eliminate the corporate income tax and tax long-term cap gains as regular income instead, with some allotment for inflation
4. Make it illegal for someone to go to college for anything that isn't STEM or business

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:16:42 2015 No.915131 >>915111 Okay then, so if you look at times where the US has implemented more redistributive policy, you should find a directly proportional amount of rich people leaving hte country?

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:21:23 2015 No.915132

>>915131
The U.S. is still mostly better than the rest of the world, so it's not really that evident. But if you do something as drastic as "do something about the rich" as OP puts it, other countries are suddenly going to look a lot more interesting to these wealthy individuals.

This has already happened in other countries before.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 21:26:33 2015 No.915136 >>915090 Because the rich buy government and foist all kinds of retarded rules on the rest of us you fucking idiot.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 22:01:51 2015 No.915164

What can be done about the rich? The wage disparity is at an all time high. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Rich people are also elitist and stuck up as fuck.

What can be done about the poor? The wage disparity is at an all time high. The poor get poorer and the rich get richer. Poor people are also egalitarian and stuck up as fuck.

^What I understood when I read your original post.

Seriously guys, what can we do about these egalitarian poor people? The stuck up ones who never worked a day in their lives for their betterment and only know how to leech off the successful people? We must organize a lesson, to make sure these poor bastards learn what hard work really is.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 22:05:27 2015 No.915167 >>915065 This. >>915090 The financially uneducated or irresponsible. Sometimes both. No one else.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 22:06:17 2015 No.915169

>>915086
I don't understand. If that means investing and dropping out at the right time, then yes.

>>915091
I never said you can become a billionaire. But you can certainly not be a poorfag forever with the right budgeting and decent investment portfolio. And besides, I don't see how that refutes my point. Capital assets literally grow faster than wages. You can be a wagecuck, or a capitalist. I'll take the winning side.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 22:09:24 2015 No.915171 >>915111 by country ! you mean Germany and by country B you mean the USA and by killing all its rich people you mean the holocaust, right?

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 22:17:06 2015 No.915176
File: 34 KB, 640x427, 1440254800021.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>be normal wageslave
>buy $5 coffee and $18 double triple quadruple McSandwich sub extra bacon bits and double extra cheese on way to work
>drive upper-middle class car despite making 30% above minimum wage, wife drives giant gas-slurping minivan
>have crippling $500.000k mortgage on way too big house your wife "just fell in love with" and besides renting is burning money right?
>have 4 children, one because you thought it would be cool, a second one to fix your crumbling relationship, the last two were twins you had when your wife pretended to be on birth control
>your wife is lazy and your 60 hour job exhausts you too much to do any housework so you eat take-out every day and have a maid several days per week

>hurr wage disparity, rich are getting richer

you can literally be a millionaire by age 40 on a median salary, all you need to do is index invest your savings and live EVER SO FUCKING SLIGHTLY below your means. Not even anything approaching frugal, just save on the big 3: housing, transportation, food.

yes I'm fucking triggered, pick related me without kids, wife, house or car

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 22:29:28 2015 No.915188 >>915176 Don't start making sense. It gets in the way of their complaining.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 22:36:02 2015 No.915198

>>915176
Well said, anon. You see this at university too.
>college kid
>just took out massive $15k loan for semester
>buys $8 chipotle discrete-o burrito
>buys $5 double mochiato frappachino café au lait whip cream double syrup grande.
>goes out later that night
>ladies night!
>$4 shots
>tab $73 + tip

It ain't the most exciting life saving money and living within your means, but I agree. You can be a millionaire by 40.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 23:08:28 2015 No.915220 >>915176 >>have 4 children i actually want to because i want a big family and think i'll do a better job preserving the white race than most of you chucklefucks. is that so bad?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 4 23:09:43 2015 No.915222 >>915064 >The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Confront the Neoliberal system that continues this. Bring back change so social mobility is more realistic and be willing to break up monopolies.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 23:15:49 2015 No.915228

>>915126

>4. Make it illegal for someone to go to college for anything that isn't STEM or business

Not illegal, but definitely not coverable by loans, public or private.

If that happens then all the Underwater Basket Weaving degrees will die by attrition and universities can get back some dignity.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 23:27:32 2015 No.915234

>>915176
>>915198

It's not even fucking hard to have fun without spending stupid amounts of money.

>take the T downtown
>put X amount of cash in your pocket
>when the money's gone, go home

>Road trips / camping
>volunteering
>getting involved in interest groups

I don't know. I just feel like some people don't understand restraint. Every time I spend money, I realize that those were hours of my life I spend to get it, so I have no desire to waste it.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 23:40:14 2015 No.915240
File: 93 KB, 480x526, Final Countdown.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>915064

There are only two solutions:

1) a rising wave of socialism

2) a rising wave of unions and proletariat bonds for higher wages

#1 is definitely gonna happen hard over the next 10 years. Hillary Clinton WILL be our next president, you can go ahead and book that shit.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 23:47:00 2015 No.915246

>>915090
>Can someone explain to me why people care so much about the rich. I hear about the 1% all the time. Who gives a flying fuck. Is everyone jealous?

It has nothing to do with jealousy, but the fact that income inequity is bad for the economy. This is a point on which both Occupy Wall Street and the International Monetary Fund agree.

>>915126

Add "tax on corporate cash holdings" and you've got a deal. Profits need to be used for expenditures or distributed as dividends.

>>915228
>universities can get back some dignity.

Universities had this before people decided they were job training centers. Even if this does happen it's purely by coincidence since the only entity that can really train you for a job is your employer.

Anonymous Sun Oct 4 23:53:02 2015 No.915254

>>915090
To expand on
>>915246

The problem with almost all of the wealth being in the top 1% is that the top 1% don't consume proportionately to the bottom 99%.

In other words, while a multi millionaire may buy 3 100k cars, 50 people driving 30k cars is way better for our consumption driven economy. The more money the middle class has to spend on consumer items, the better everyone does.

Traditional shopping malls are dying because less and less people have the money to just go out and blow on recreational shopping.

Anonymous Mon Oct 5 00:09:58 2015 No.915265

>>915254
>In other words, while a multi millionaire may buy 3 100k cars, 50 people driving 30k cars is way better for our consumption driven economy.

To put something closer to actual numbers on this, the cost to manufacture a luxury car (Lexus, Mercedes, etc) and an economy car (Honda, Ford, Kia) are about the same. The cost of steel, aluminum and plastic are about the same. The cost of labor to assemble is about the same. The cost of shipping the car is identical for all intents and purposes. Design cost might differ but that's a fraction of the cost of the vehicle.

Now, you can have a rich guy buy three Mercedes for 300k or fifteen average Joes buy a Ford for 20k. Which is better for the economy? The Fords, of course, because it takes five times more economic activity to deliver those vehicles as it does to deliver three Mercedes. Five times more auto workers get jobs to build the Fords. Five times more miners to mine the materials. Five times more truckers to deliver them.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 5 00:28:57 2015 No.915287 File: 102 KB, 339x360, 1427410164265.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>915101 >before it's too late Son, it was too late 10 years ago.

Anonymous Mon Oct 5 00:56:48 2015 No.915323

There is literally nothing wrong with income disparity. Don't like it? Then get good.

>>915265
There's a efficient level of consumer demand in any economic system, and "as much as possible" is usually not the right answer. Unless you can show that wealth redistribution would both (a) increase demand, and (b) increase GDP, in each case not offset by negative externalities such an inflation, then your argument fails.

Anonymous Mon Oct 5 01:46:23 2015 No.915361

>>915254
>Traditional shopping malls are dying because less and less people have the money to just go out and blow on recreational shopping.
This is part of the reason. I'm okay with that though, because we need to move away from the consumer waste portion of our economy. The purchase of things only to trash them a year later is a bunch of bullshit. Either up the recycling and reclamation sector if you want to keep up the consumer economy, or let that shit decline.

I hate the OMG EVERYBODY BUY EVEYRTHING rhetoric when it comes to what we "need" to be a "healthy" economy.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 5 17:44:10 2015 No.916007 >>915090 >Is everyone jealous? Yep. Envy is a very powerful emotion, and it's easy to rally people to your cause through emotional arguments involving the mystery boogeyman of the 1%. It divides people and gets you votes.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 5 17:48:53 2015 No.916009 >>915323 >There is literally nothing wrong with income disparity. Don't like it? Then get good. Except for the part when they just become useless parasites by hoarding the money instead of moving it like the middle class would.

Anonymous Mon Oct 5 18:10:01 2015 No.916027

>>915323
>There is literally nothing wrong with income disparity.

The International Monetary Fund thinks you're wrong.

>Unless you can show that wealth redistribution would both (a) increase demand, and (b) increase GDP, in each case not offset by negative externalities such an inflation, then your argument fails.

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=42986.0

"To tackle inequality, financial inclusion is imperative in emerging and developing countries while in advanced economies, policies should focus on raising human capital and skills and making tax systems more progressive."

>http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2015/NEW061715A.htm

"New IMF research shows that if you lift the income share of the poor and middle class by 1 percentage point, then GDP growth increases by as much as 0.38 percentage points in a country over five years. By contrast, if you lift the income share of the rich by 1 percentage point, then GDP growth decreases by 0.08 percentage points."

TL;DR: "Incomes are far too unequal right now and we need to tax the rich and redistribute the money to the lower and middle class" -- the IMF

Anonymous Mon Oct 5 18:11:37 2015 No.916029

>>916009
>Except for the part when they just become useless parasites by hoarding the money instead of moving it like the middle class would.
Citation required.

This myth of the altruistic free-spending middle class earner needs to stop. On average, everyone spends in proportion to their income and wealth.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 5 18:38:48 2015 No.916071 >/pol/ tier bait thread >42 replies >Half the people actually seriously believe what the OP said.

Anonymous Mon Oct 5 18:39:42 2015 No.916072 [DELETED]

>>916029
>On average, everyone spends in proportion to their income and wealth.
Citation required.

The IMF thinks that greater income inequity will be beneficial to the world economy. The IMF is in favour of tax hikes on the rich. The myth that people spend in proportion to their income needs to stop.

Anonymous Mon Oct 5 18:41:08 2015 No.916075

>>916029
>On average, everyone spends in proportion to their income and wealth.
Citation required.

The IMF thinks that greater income equity will be beneficial to the world economy. The IMF is in favour of tax hikes on the rich. The myth that people spend in proportion to their income needs to stop.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 6 22:08:50 2015 No.917453 >>915081 Bitch I'mma fight you with slick words. Your momma likes to lick turds You're beautiful and everyone loves you -rick teh warrior poet

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 6 22:18:51 2015 No.917469 >>915132 within the last 60 or so years. Basically Cuba, and China. Ever notice why in california there are a fuck ton of family owned chinese mini-malls. And why to get anything done in florida you have to speak spanish

Anonymous Tue Oct 6 22:28:52 2015 No.917480

We've created a world where CEOs are the top priority, not the product or the employees. The reason that they're so overpaid is because companies think handing them fat checks is a good way to push stock prices higher. Your raise is going into their pockets.

Anonymous Tue Oct 6 22:40:12 2015 No.917492

>>915074
>work a lifetime to provide for my family
>son inherits my legacy when I die to pass on the family name
>he tries to live his life with the comfort his father left to him.
>"you strait STEELIN NIGGAH!"
>"y dnt u spred sumdat wealth around YOU FUCKING PIRATE"
>"u dint ERN dat MUnny."

Crybaby little faggot. Man up and go make your own. Its not our fault you and the general populace lack the creativity needed to make something of yourselves.

Anonymous Tue Oct 6 23:21:19 2015 No.917535

>>917492

It's funny how you don't see the disconnect between telling people to "go make your own" and wanting to have to save your son the bother of having to do the same.

Your position is understandable, but it's not even remotely sound economic policy for a nation to allow such a thing.

Here's a reminder that the modern "welfare state" was created by Otto Von Bismark as a means to aid and support industry. Healthy (universal medicine), skilled and educated (state supported schools) workers who won't be financially ruined by losing their jobs (unemployment benefits) or being injured (disability benefits) and who will be taken care of when they are too old to work (state pensions) are exactly what industry needs to be productive, efficient and competitive.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 6 23:25:45 2015 No.917541 >>915064 Don't be an idiot. The rich are getting richer but so are the poor. They're just getting richer at a slower pace.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 00:38:22 2015 No.917626 >>917535 lol you libtardes. Do you know how far we are in debt because people would rather live of tax payer money then get a fucking job.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 03:46:42 2015 No.917727 >>915198 >$8 chipotle excrete-o burrito Money not the only thing to burn.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 10:14:59 2015 No.917889 >>915240 >Shillary >Socialist I bet you think Obama is a socialist too faggot

Anonymous Wed Oct 7 11:50:22 2015 No.917971

>>917492
> lack the creativity
Its really one of the two things holding people back. The other one is skills to embody their creativity in a digital/physical good that can be sold. If you want to get higher up on the ladder - work on those two, gentlemen.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 15:18:42 2015 No.918150 >>915064 Publically adulate those who, like Warran Buffet and Bill Gates, have a sense of Noblesse Oblige. Write intelligent, emotionally neutral articles about how the divergence of upper and lower class interests is not in the best interest of anyone.

Anonymous Wed Oct 7 18:21:08 2015 No.918296

>>917626
>lol you libtardes. Do you know how far we are in debt because people would rather live of tax payer money then get a fucking job.

You might have a point if unemployment and underemployment didn't exist, but they do. If you need it spelled out that means there are more people than there are jobs, and it is literally impossible for everyone to "get a fucking job".

People "living on taxpayer money" is exactly what you want to happen in this situation, since the alternative is people starving in the streets, and anyone who doesn't want to get shanked for their wallet would agree that's a bad thing.

>>917541
>The rich are getting richer but so are the poor. They're just getting richer at a slower pace.

This is precisely what income inequity is, and exactly what the International Monetary Fund thinks is a problem.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 18:45:04 2015 No.918316 >>918296 You're a retard.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 18:57:46 2015 No.918326 >>915064 disparity is high because the democrats have stratified the economy into the super-rich and the poor. build the middle class again.

Anonymous Wed Oct 7 18:58:22 2015 No.918328

>>915074
>I am not talking about the ones who work hard and come from nothing, but the ones who merely won the genetic lottery.
So you're saying that when I die, instead of leaving everything to my children, I should just dole it out to a bunch of people I never met so that they can reap the rewards of my hard work, my fathers hard work, my grandfathers hard work?

Please, explain to me why I'd choose to do that.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 19:00:41 2015 No.918330 >>915064 Have you ever thought about not spending all your money? Accumulate wealth. There's no trick to it faggot.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 7 19:19:21 2015 No.918347 >>918296 The IMF thinks that the income inequity between the salaried class is bad, not that the rich have to pay 80% taxes so that the communist SJWs stop whining. See >>918316

Anonymous Wed Oct 7 20:08:20 2015 No.918397

>>918347
>The IMF thinks that the income inequity between the salaried class is bad,

Yeah, no, you're wrong and are too lazy to read even part of the thread. This is why you're an idiot.

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=42986.0

"To tackle inequality, financial inclusion is imperative in emerging and developing countries while in advanced economies, policies should focus on raising human capital and skills and making tax systems more progressive."

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2015/NEW061715A.htm

"New IMF research shows that if you lift the income share of the poor and middle class by 1 percentage point, then GDP growth increases by as much as 0.38 percentage points in a country over five years. By contrast, if you lift the income share of the rich by 1 percentage point, then GDP growth decreases by 0.08 percentage points."

>>918328
>Please, explain to me why I'd choose to do that.

The whole point is you won't have a choice because the laws don't regard your family in particular as a special snowflake worthy of special treatment. If they really are I'm sure your descendants can build their own wealth. If they can't then I guess your just a bunch of mediocre losers who had a rich ancestor.

Anonymous Wed Oct 7 21:26:36 2015 No.918466

>>918296
>People "living on taxpayer money" is exactly what you want to happen in this situation, since the alternative is people starving in the streets, and anyone who doesn't want to get shanked for their wallet would agree that's a bad thing.

easy - ust put them in ghettos and make sure the police stop them and harass them if they wander into an area where they don't belong

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 08:27:52 2015 No.918799

Don't ask them, just hang them on lamposts.
Though, you westerner have no chance, since your are muh individualism, competition, shit on your neighbour, eat your nearest and dearest, blah blah blah all the time. Power in numbers and unity that's what worker for collectivists like Russians and Chinese.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 08:31:12 2015 No.918802

In other words, until you think of yourself more than of community nothing will change, you all will be weak and prey upon by rich gangs.
Strikes don't work out, if its 5% of clowns and 95% of cowards. When 95-100% of workers go on strike, then the leaders star shitting their silk pants.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 08:49:04 2015 No.918811 >>915093 In all fairness, they did create the subprime mortgage crisis.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:12:21 2015 No.918822

>>915111
This is why there is an implicit agreement between rich and poor with each side doing something:

Poor: I will strive hard for you and you will allocate my labor in a way that allows me to earn a living.

Rich: I will give you the basic income you need and keep the rest. I will not fuck you over too bad, because I know that when the gap between haves and have-nots becomes too great, you guys will be calling for my head on a pike.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:13:27 2015 No.918823 >>915132 Hasn't it happened to France recently?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:17:29 2015 No.918825 >>915198 15k loan for the semester? I was able to get my 4 year degree taking a wee bit more than 15k for the whole shebang. That's without working the whole 4 years, very little parental support and California cost of living.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:31:54 2015 No.918835

>>915323
Inflation isn't a negative externality. I'm glad to see you trying to drop econ terminology to sound smarter.

Why isn't it an externality? Externalities are things that are external to the market. I sell you gasoline and there's a negative externality of the pollution because I didn't account for my pollution damage in my market price. Realize that inflation IS internalized to the price because inflation has a direct effect on the price of the good. If inflation pushes up the price of my good 5x, you're probably going to buy less of it, which is bad for me. See how internalized inflation is to the market transactions that you as a buyer and I as a seller go through?

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:34:17 2015 No.918838

>>915361
This is actually a pretty legit point. Sure, consumption drives the economy, but it is only worthwhile if the good produced and consumed is beneficial to the economy itself.

Some meat being produced by a farmer is consumption, good for the economy, and nutritional, so good for the society. Coca Cola, is consumption, good for economy, but really bad for the people who buy them, even imposing economic costs on their life (say, medical costs for diabetes).

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:37:43 2015 No.918842 >>917469 >Florida you have to speak Spanish because of immigration waves from Cuba >implying Florida wasn't a Spanish colony until the late 1700's.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:41:03 2015 No.918844 >>918316 Wow, way to lift the intellectual value of this thread with that post. Kuidos, may your insightful and yet pithy comment will forever stimulate the thoughts of those who read it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:42:52 2015 No.918846 >>918799 >>918802 My country had communism. I was born just a few months before it collapsed but my sources told me communism actually wasn't a good idea. Why do you poorfags never wonder why people who actually had communism don't want it anymore?

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:50:30 2015 No.918853

>>918328
If you've spent your whole life extracting profits from the economy, then you should give some of it back to society. For instance, there are employees at your work who weren't paid enough to not take government benefits (janitors, etc), so the government had to dole out cash in order for you to make those profits. Or if you produce pretty much anything, there's the pollution costs of you doing business, which negatively affects society while putting cash in your pocket.

When it comes down to it, no business can completely avoid having the government/society paying some of its costs. Additionally, a lot of the things that the government does specifically make it easier to run a successful business in your country. Things like infastructure (being able to drive to work, customers being able to go to your business), rule of law (easier to earn money if you don't have to hire armed guards to avoid getting robbed on the way home) and basic education (its nice that even your minimum wage workers can read your invoices and do basic math well enough to run the register and collect you money). These benefits are covered mostly/exclusively by the government and put money in your pocket.

These are the reasons why giving up some of your inheritance up for tax actually makes a lot of sense, especially when you're very wealthy when you die. Something like 15% of estates over 5 million would exclude 99+% of Americans while still helping to ensure that the society is properly structured to allow the next generation of businesses to thrive (infrastructure, rule of law, educated citizens, external costs).

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 09:59:32 2015 No.918858

>>918799
> Power in numbers and unity that's what worker for collectivists like Russians and Chinese.
How ironic, then, that Russians and Chinese are much poorer and less politically free than Americans or most Europeans. "muh individualism, competition, shit on your neighbour, eat your nearest and dearest, blah blah blah" seems to be working out pretty well for the western world.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 10:01:32 2015 No.918860

>>918802
>In other words, until you think of yourself more than of community nothing will change, you all will be weak and prey upon by rich gangs.
In other words, you believe conformity leads to strength and not fallen prey to "rich gangs" (i.e. government), even though there is no proof in history or present day to support your argument?

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 10:14:38 2015 No.918870

>>915164
>egalitarian
>bad

>>915246
>Universities had this before people decided they were job training centers. Even if this does happen it's purely by coincidence since the only entity that can really train you for a job is your employer.

This

I never got why people think universities should just become glorified community colleges. You should go to university to study what you like, but only if you've got the means. The problem arises when everyone thinks that you absolutely 100% need to go to college to be a respectable human being and worker, and take on a 100k debt. You should go there if you belong there

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 10:26:46 2015 No.918875

>>918870
> You should go there if you belong there
The mantra of 2015 A.D. is "if you think you belong there, you belong there". Most people think too highly of themselves and aren't ready to admit that they might be too stupid for higher learning to be of any use to them - assuming they have the capacity required for a university degree.

This is not going to change until the public acknowledges how far apart the elite and plebs are in terms of intelligence.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 10:34:23 2015 No.918878

>>918858
If Russia/China switched to American-style capitalism tomorrow, they would collapse just as hard as they did back in '91. The makeup of their countries' demographics and geopolitics means that they require a larger degree of central control over economic/social issues to stay competitive with the rest of the world.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 10:37:30 2015 No.918879

>>918875
>how far apart the elite and plebs are in terms of intelligence.

While that is true, I have yet to find an accurate indicator for who is an intelligence elite and who isn't. There are complete idiots in academia (my field), in business (my father and mother's field), and I assume in all other fields too

Some of the best work I've seen has been done by kids who were born with barely more than the clothes on their back, as well as by kids who were born with a solid gold spoon in their mouths. Saying that the rich are smarter than the poor doesn't hold in my experience. Sure, they know more languages, and are good at rote repetition, but hardly any smarter

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 13:09:27 2015 No.918986

>>918835
>Inflation isn't a negative externality.
In the context of this discussion, it is. We're talking about wealth redistribution and its potential effect on GDP, not about markets and their efficiency.

In this context, inflation is an "externality" because it exists outside the framework of any wealth redistribution schema. Therefore, when quantifying the pros and cons of wealth redistribution, inflation is external to the redistribution system itself.

>I'm glad to see you trying to drop econ terminology to sound smarter.
Um, since when does using the correct words for things equate to "dropping terminology." Don't project your insecurities just because you only learned these concepts last month in your Econ 101 class.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 15:48:39 2015 No.919113
File: 755 KB, 2048x1536, IMG_20150306_171814.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>915064
>All children are given a compulsory examination before their third birthday in order to assess their suitability for various fields of work & study.
>All children are taken from their homes at least six months before their fourth birthday and indoctrinated into a Legion.

>At formation, each Legion consists of exactly one thousand sequentially-numbered children plus twenty-four juvenile cadre (the latter designated by a single letter); these numbers will diminish over time due to the rigors of training (wash-outs, quitters, casualties, etc).

>After an entire decade, all surviving children graduate from their Legion (and all remaining cadre are promoted to full adult status).

>At any time during adulthood, former Child Legionnaires may be recalled by their Legion to serve the Nation in War.

I'm sorry; I just ejaculated, so now I'm closing this post.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 16:00:08 2015 No.919117

>>918986
>In the context of this discussion, it is

No it isn't.

Regardless of the terminology you're being retarded anyway. When you're talking about increases in real GDP caused by a positive demand shock then clearly inflation isn't a negative externality you fucking retard lmao.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 16:03:08 2015 No.919119 >>919113 What's that pic? Looks like a regular house in India.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 16:13:10 2015 No.919130

The situation is simple. There are producers and consumers. Rich = Producers, Poor = Consumers. Poor people spend a higher percentage of their income vs rich people. Poor people consume what companies have to offer. Who owns those companies?

The poor work hard for their shitty wages and then go out and spend it on things which lines the rich peoples pockets with profits.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 17:02:17 2015 No.919171 >>919117 Great strategy kid: whenever you're losing an argument, change the definitions and go ad hominem. Could you be any dumber?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 21:01:45 2015 No.919434 >>918986 I love it how those who don't know economics love to accuse others of having only taken Econ 101 It's a telltale sign you're dealing with a pseud who's in way over his head

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 21:07:52 2015 No.919439 >>918328 Silly anon. Of course you wouldn't choose to do that. The government can choose FOR you. There are lots more poor voters than rich ones.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 8 21:13:13 2015 No.919444 >>919434 >stupid comment >personal attack >off topic >poorly written Nice contribution to the thread.

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 21:18:52 2015 No.919456

>>918853
>extracting profits from the economy
Seriously wat. "The economy" is not a mine where you go to extract dollars or whatever. Commerce is not about acquiring money, it's about using money to facilitate the trade of goods and services.

>all this "you didn't build that" shit
Go to bed Barack.

>would exclude 99+%
Because it's okay to do backwards, unfair, and punitive things to people as long as they are a small enough minority right?

Anonymous Thu Oct 8 22:18:26 2015 No.919545

Well it's simple

>producers (business owners) make money

>consumers (wage slaves) spend money

their is no wage gap since top 1% own a money generating asses while middle class people work. You can easily go from 100k to 1 mil sales running a biz but you can't go to your boss and ask them to double or triple your wage.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 9 03:32:40 2015 No.919766 >>919171 Lmao come back and continue the discussion once you've learnt the difference between real and nominal variables.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/biz/ - Business & Finance