What privilege does the rich have and how do they screw the rest 99%?

In other words, dodging an answer to my question would blow your opinion out of the water about "how the rich hurt the poor."

Leave you alone? Why? Because you can't pose a reasonable response to a simple question? Lame Johnny!

 

Say what you want/will... I'm not wasting my time on your foolish closed-mindedness.

 

It's called, "objective physical reality."

How odd that you can't actually refute any of those fallacies...

I guess the facts I explained to you remain a mystery. Sorry I could not find a way to be clearer.

 

You could offshore it, and some business could not get a loan to start up from an American bank. Taking money out of circulation hurts others.

You could have gained it in the stock market, thus stealing the profits the worker made that are needed to give him a wage increase and other benefits.

You could simply not buy a product from my store, and forcing me to shut down.

We might both work for the same company doing the same thing, and because of skin color, the boss pays you more, thus reducing what I can be paid.

 

I would ask other members to respect the family tragedy Dan40 suffered, and not to make any insensitive references to the choices he and his loved ones made. I can't imagine how painful it must be to lose a child that way. IMO the only thing more painful would be to be the parent of the drunk driver that killed him (I guess that would include parents of suicides, OD victims, etc.). A childhood friend of mine killed one of his best buds in a car crash, and it destroyed him and his family emotionally. They never recovered from it.

 

Liberal/communist, dogma and propaganda is unrelated to any facts. I do understand that you cannot conceive of that simple truth. But that is your problem and I don't care.

 

Your asking the wrong question. It's not what privilege the rich have. It's how come the gap has gotten so wide. Here's what I am talking about; http://www.bing.com/images/search?q...00F0AF9C5FED4ED7233B399619518&selectedIndex=1 That is the real problem. It has nothing to do with people getting rich by their own efforts.

 

Can you dispute this fact that prove otherwise? With links of course; http://www.bing.com/images/search?q...00F0AF9C5FED4ED7233B399619518&selectedIndex=1

 

Why do rich folk always believe that 'if I can do it, so can you' -

isn't that just arrogant ego-puffing?

 

The "vulture" chart....... The reason is REAL SIMPLE. It's called "investments" and I know this is going to be hard for progressives to grasp but.... there's a global economy to invest in. The world economy has essentially exploded over the last 30 years with the advent of automation and computer technology.

According to progressives, the only way you should be able to get rich is through physical labor. Good luck unless your pro sports player.....

- - - Updated - - -

WHAT specifically is stopping you?

 

A lack of the required natural attributes.

How can that be rectified?

 

Edited your question to reflect what you should be asking and the answer is NO. At least until we perfect genetic modification.

 

So in that case, it can be seen that a lot of the right wing dogma is mere cant.

Because If we cannot change our natural attributes, then we do not all have the equal opportunity to be rich.

 

No I believe that's what they call false modesty.

 

I can't figure out if your rolling laughing because you failed economics 101, or your alternate universe you live in has really played a joke on you. Either way, I think if you open your economics book to chapter 1 they highlighted the first introductory page for you. It reads something like this; there are investor's who sometimes create companies that require the assistance of other people to get that company off the ground. Those are called his or her workers/employees. They usually share in the investors company profits through a wage. The wage is usually smaller than the investor.

However, the investor company/ worker employee relationship is very important. Because without the worker/employee making a wage being paid by the investor, the investor wouldn't make anything either.

And in summary, in today's economy, it is impossible for everyone to be an investor, the same that not everyone can be just a worker. They both need each other to succeed. And when one laughs that off as a joke, the joke is usually on the one laughing.

 

You know what explains that chart?

A lot of people like the products of a few companies and as such their owners get a lot of money.

This isn't rocket science and there's nothing unfair about that.

 

The rich have no advantages, REALLY? I would have thought even you would have more power to deduce the truth than that, I see I am wrong on that count.

 

Can you explain that in a more thorough understanding? For example, break it down for us to get more technical. How is it that in 1979 an average workers wages
only went up about 2to 3 percentage points up until the present, while the well off have seen their incomes go into the 270's percentage since 1979? Explain in detail how that is right please. Everyone in america wants to know by the way. So, we will be waiting. Thanks!

By the way, I almost forgot; "a lot of people like the products of a few companies and as such their owners get a lot of money". But that does not explain the vulture chart and workers having the same wages since 1979. It has nothing to do with companies selling products a lot of people like. Just thought I'd remind you of that.

 

Looks like you forgot the "global" part..... Investors didn't make their money exclusively on U.S business DUH.

Everyone in America COULD be an investor and most of us are if we contribute to IRA'S, 401K's ect.

 

That is not a problem; the chart is simply a lie with charts. The amount of proportional wealth per quintile has been the same for 200 years. Don't be stupid.

 

They don't value their work any more than they used to so the wages don't go up. That's why. And as it's their company they can pay people whatever they want as long as it's at least minimum wage.

 

Maybe I'm the one who needs to be laughing you off. I didn't forget about global investors and no one mentioned them either. You just did. And? What about them? Somewhere, somehow those investors making investments globally relied on workers originally at some point in time for that to happen. That money didn't pop out of thin air without a source from, wait a minute, you guessed it, workers.

And so, we were discussing a better wage for workers right?

 

My close mindedness? Have you read your posts lately? I produced support. You won't even answer a simple question because you won't like your own answer to it. You have lost credibility.

 

Since off shorting creates more jobs than it costs, what is your point? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/12/study-offshoring-creates-as-many-u-s-jobs-as-it-kills/

Making money in the stock market is not stealing anything. But having stock pay dividends means people had jobs, made money and there was a profit for the company. Every one wins.

Who does that help?

What I make doesn't reduce what you make.

 

Correct! http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/04/24/pay-gap-rich-poor/ Don't blame the 1% for the pay gap.