"Study: The widening gap between the rich and the rest of us is ‘unsustainable’"

The false belief that wealth is finite ? I hate to burst your bubble but try telling someone eating a bowl of rice a day in Africa that "Wealth is infinite".

Most economic theories that I am aware of state that there is a finite amount of goods and services produced each year.
Distribution of these goods and services is not based on the idea that there is an infinite amount of goods and services.

 

I call it the Popcorn theory. If you make a pie chart of wealth you can see that the slice for the Rich is very large and growing. The slice for the rest of the raging masses is shrinking.

This is not new from a historical standpoint. Historically this shrinkage can only occur for so long before the masses revolt.

When you put some oil into the pot and turn on the heat and look at the popcorn kernels, I can not tell you which one will pop first. What I can tell you however is that at some point in time (provided the heat is left on) one of those kernels will pop... then another and another and pretty soon the lid will come off the pot.

As the piece of pie for the raging masses shrinks this will increase the stress and discontent of the masses. I do not know which one will pop first but I can tell you that if the heat is left on for too long the lid will blow off the pot.

The Roman Senate would debate at length about how to keep the poor fed. This has been a pressing concern for almost every nation throughout history for exactly the same reason... they were trying to keep the lid on the pot.

It is not secret to anyone who has studied such things from a historical perspective.

This is an educated guess but it is completely logical that at least part of the reason our leaders (be it Republican or Democrat) are stripping away privacy rights and spending large amounts of treasure and energy spying on the raging masses is because they are worried that the ratio of heat to popcorn kernels is getting out of balance.

 

My happiness about this is curbed by my envy.

peace

 

That is a 100% false statement, so let's get that out of the way right from the get go. Common folk don't need the massive taxes and massive government that destroys jobs and cripples our rights, which is what the Dems give us. They need an unfettered free society where they can prosper, which is what the GOP's gives us.

A report. From Harvard. A bunch of pointy heads who don't know the first thing about job creation in the real world.

First of all, if the rich get richer, who cares. Wealth is not a finite pie that gets sliced up and if one gets more another gets less. Wealth is "created", often by something as simple as an idea. Bill Gates had an idea, "Windows", and that idea morphed into wealth. His idea did not steal wealth from some other sector. People who think that wealth is a finite number are idiots.

The question is, why do the middle class get poorer, which has nothing to do with the rich getting richer.

The answer: Monetary policy. The dollar is worthless compared to what it used to be, which is why things SEEM more expensive, and why people FEEL poorer.

And Obama has been Criminal Number One at printing money and making the dollar worthless, having rotten monetary policies - along with other rotten policies on energy and trade and more - all of which have the cumulative effect of making the middle class wealth decrease.

 

I, of course, was referring to the Banks YOU named. But of course, thats why you now want to dash off to these other banks. Watch the silly little man run.

 

Don't run just educate yourself. The banks I named all own the Federal reserve and made more money in interest by turning around and putting the TBTF bail out tax money back into the federal reserve to collect dividends on. It isn't the small banks that own stock it is the ones I mentioned. Yes we gave them money at 2% APR so they could safely put it on their spread sheets and make 6% year after year. They scammed us.
"For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year. "http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

 

Proves you have no idea what wealth is
wealth is anything with value
labor is wealth ideas are wealth ingenuity is wealth and those are all infinite

 

""Study: The widening gap between the rich and the rest of us is ‘unsustainable’""

did not need a study to show us that, history will repeat itself as greed destroys once again unless we stop it

 

There has never been any society like ours in history where even poor people have luxuries never dreamed of. How can history repeat itself when history has no precedent.

 

In that context of the conversation wealth is not finite. Of course in an infinite period of time in an infinite universe there is infinite wealth.

The notion that somehow there is infinite wealth available on an annual basis for distribution among the masses is abject silliness.

 

what part of "anything of value is wealth" do you not understand you under the false premise only thing that has wealth is tangible has substance people make millions on just ideas and thought alone

 

They would rather see everyone equally poor, than only some being poor and all others better off.

 

... of just the promise of future work. Which is basically the definition of a dollar. Promises can be infinite.






​

 

What part of "wealth is not infinite" in the context of the conversation do you not understand. There is not an infinite amount of "wealth" available for distribution to the raging masses at a given point in time.

Quit digging yourself deeper into a hole.

 

I advise you to go educate your self on what wealth is because you don't have a freaken clue

first of all you don't get to define the context the context is wealth and wealth is infinite period end of discussion there for it doesn't need to be redistributed more just needs to be created

 

Division of the revenue the average American creates

 

Neither. Time to move beyond the two party paradigm.

 

The democrats pander to the poor witht heir social programs. the party that supports growth and personal gains is the republican party

 

Where are the operational expenses and capital investments? And I would venture to guess the tax number including corporate, employer share of FICA, excise, state and local.

 

The context has already been defined. The context is "wealth that is available for distribution". Not some fictitious construct of infinite wealth that does not exist in real terms.

There is not infinite wealth available for distribution or consumption at any given time. The Earth has limited resources and we have yet to be able to feasibly capitalize on outer space. (It costs more wealth to get these resources than we would get back in return = no ROI = negative wealth)

2) I already granted that infinite wealth could possibly be created over an infinite period of time.

Unfortunately we do not have an infinite period of time. The Question is how much wealth is available "right now" at this point in time. and the answer is not "infinity" nor can we create "infinite wealth" in the period of a year or a lifetime.

In the context of the conversation there is not "infinite wealth".

 

Yep. That's what socialism, leftism, and liberalism do: They do not lift people up, they drag everyone else down.

 

For the richest.

- - - Updated - - -

Funny, the rich did pretty well in the 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s and 90s.

 

It appears that neither the republicans or democrats with their respective policy blunders can do much to come to our aid. Time to start looking for some new solutions?

 

Maybe we could compel the bloated Super Rich to disgorge their ill-gotten gains. Then we could take their billions and give it, not to the government, but directly to the people.

Conservatives please consider: most of the Super Rich are LIBERALS. Wouldn't you like to disempower people like George Soros and Warren Buffett and Thomas Steyer?

Maybe we could also declare that the bottom 2/3 of the population shall never pay taxes of any kind.

We could overthrow both the limousine liberals and the country club Republicans.

 

I believe we merely need to use Socialism to bailout Capitalism like usual by correcting for the market recognizable inefficiency of human capital with any natural rate of unemployment. Why not bailout the People, with the Peoples tax monies by solving for simple poverty in our republic.