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

Actually we can see that a lot of right wing extremist dogma AND a lot of the left wing extremist dogma is mere can't.

 

If and when you discover that the one who got more, did not take it away from the ones who got less, you will be on the road to recovery.

If you want to see the facts instead of hype, look at this chart from the BLS which shows an after inflation adjustment for 35 years.
View attachment 25017 Click on the image and you will see that the top 3 quintiles all went up after adjustment for inflation.

 

Wait a minute. You told me before that the vulture chart was like that because people liked the products a lot and the owners made a lot of money. Now you tell me they, I guess you mean owners, don't value their work so the wages don't go up. So, the people like the products, the owner makes more money and the owner doesn't value the worker. That makes about as much sense as pouring a full glass of water into a full glass of water. Your talking total nonsense. You should get your excuses in order. Which is it; people like the products and the owner makes more money, or the workers aren't worth anymore while the owner still makes more money? Seems to me Capitalism has a funny way of weighing apples for apples in this crazy equation of yours. There is no Capitalism in running a business like that. You just explained a perfect example of why Capitalism has lost its way in this country.

You didn't explain the vulture chart, but I sure did. Thanks to you!

 

You already get paid what your labor is worth. If you don't think so quit your job and look for another DUH. Labor is dependent on supply and demand. You may want to open that Economics textbook up and read about it.

 

It depends on the company. Some really can't afford to play workers any more. The top 1% companies? Well they probably can, and in some cases do, and in some cases don't. No one is (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ing about it to a great extent evidently, so they see no reason not to just take more of the profits.

 

Yes, we have equal opportunity. Your natural attributes have nothing to do with having access to the same infrastructure, colleges, schools and banks anyone else has DUH.

 

Wrong again! If wages haven't gone up for the middle class since 1979 it's all people and all companies, not "it depends on the company". Your argument here is losing lots of ground fast. No one is (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about it. Again, your not making any sense. If no one was doing that, then why is there a discussion about it everyday in the news?

And of course you never addressed my last post. You gave reasons about the vulture chart, then those reasons changed to something else. Have you made up your mind which one it is yet; people liking the products so owners make more money with the same wages for workers, or workers aren't worth anymore while the owner still makes more money? Your answer cannot be it depends on the company, because what you said included two different versions of what the vulture chart meant. The part you mentioned about "depends on the company" wouldn't make any sense, you having different explanations of the chart. And if a company does decide one, it still wrongs the worker. They still end up making more money and the worker makes the same. But in the meantime, you have failed miserably making any sense. You keep changing your story explaining the vulture chart. So spell it out. Which one is it?

 

If we're talking about top 1%ers then to be brutally honest the answer is that more people are giving them money and they are not then splitting it up the new profit among their employees in the same proportions as before. And if you don't think that's fair, tough luck. It's his money and he can do whatever the (*)(*)(*)(*) he wants with it.

 

Took you long enough to spit it out. Dude, no one with any basic knowledge of economics will tell you that is Capitalism. That is why the chart is there, and that is why I will keep showing it. As long as that is the attitude you just displayed, and that is how this country is going to run its businesses, that is no longer Capitalism. For your information it's called Corporatism.

And one other thing, I see once again you never gave any reason why you gave two totally different versions of the owner/employee wage relationship.You got caught in that fumble with no way out. Just proves the right is clueless in this on going struggle with the employer/employee wage fairness fight. The pitiful excuse you give is the classic we always hear. Without an ounce of fairness to go with that excuse, except for greed.

 

I should have mentioned both of them at the same time, I do not know why I didn't mention both my arguments at once. They tie in with each other: the consumers give the company more money, the company doesn't value their workers' more than they already do so the new profit goes to the owner.

It's not corporatism. Corporatism would be marked by monopolistic corporate control of everything, with no allowance for competition. As long as corps get legal protections or benefits because they pay for re-election campaigns, corporatism will grow in strength, however. We are not there yet though.

I don't care what you think is fair. Fundamentally, it is their money, they own it and they can do what they wish with it. If you don't support that, don't give them your money.

 

Just drop it with me, then. I won't push you to agree with me. Where you're headed, I am sure enough that you are wrong. Even so, maybe you've got something on me being closed-minded on this... And let's just disagree here/now.

 

The laws as written, offer the wealthy advantages which are not afforded most other Americans.
That needs to be corrected.

 

Of course it matters.

If you are brighter, better looking, more popular, stronger, better at sports etc.. these give you an immense advantage.

How could they not?

 

TIL from you, advantages = privilege.

No wonder you changed from a conservative to a liberal.

 

Having an immense advantage due to natural ability doesn't negate the fact we all have equal access to opportunity. Society CANNOT do ANYTHING BUT ensure equal access to opportunity. It can't make you smarter, better looking etc.

- - - Updated - - -

Where the hell do these people come from??????

 

Such as?

 

But that is exactly what it is, a monopoly from competition. If you do away with competitive wages and they stay as they are for decades, that is a monopoly over the people themselves. And when corporations control the wages, they are controlling everything. And you are wrong. It is not that we aren't there yet, we've already been there for decades. People like you need to wake up and see what's been staring you in the face for decades now. Are you familiar with the Roman times? If you are, it doesn't take a genius to figure out they are back.

I

 

And if and when you discover that the one's who are making 270% more than what they made in 1979 can afford to also pay the help they have more, who are still making the same since 1979, changing our monopolistic, corporate catering society such as what we have now, you will be the one on the road to recovery. It's the modern day Roman empire all over again. And it's not happening as some accident. This is not some weird phenomenon in our economic history that is new to the world. It's just human nature economics pushing itself back into the lives of the little man. That economics push is called greed.

 

If I have to explain that to you... it will only be a waste of time convincing you. I will only invite you to view and pay attention to the overall picture of reality

You surely don't have to believe me, but I do see what I need to see... in order to place my votes properly.

- - - Updated - - -

You nailed it; perfectly!! Bravo!!

 

The most wide spread and damaging privilege is the private collection of land rent, a privilege which ensures that the poor will stay poor regardless of how much effort they put in. They will stay poor because every time opportunity affords them a chance to save some money, their landlord will see that extra money and increase his rent demands. This is proven by simply looking around at places where the poor do earn more money, and at such places the landlords take 2 or 3 times as much in rent as where wages are lower. If wages rise more at any of these locations, the landlords will simply take more in rent. Replacing other tax systems with a land value tax would eliminate this privilege and the damage it inflicts on the economy.

The next most damaging privilege is probably the bankers privilege of creating money out of debt. By constantly expanding debt and the money supply, the bankers are devaluing the wages of workers and the savings of producers. When bankers make a loan the capital purchased is taken out of the general economy, thus lowering the value of wages, but it is the banker who collects the interest, even though he does not supply the real capital. Then of course there is the periodic banking crisis in which bankers get bailed out at taxpayer expense … this seems to happen at least once every ten years or so.

The third most damaging privilege is IP laws which are designed to create monopolies and scarcity. IP laws are used extensively to build barriers (patent thickets) that prevent new talent from supplying the market with new technology directly. Fear of IP lawsuits force new talent into the employment of established patent holders, and this is how people like Bill Gates keep getting richer off of inventions and discoveries of others.

The forth most damaging privilege is occupational licensing and union privileges which again create barriers to entry, resulting in scarcity rents. If medical doctors want higher wages all they have to do is increase the licensing requirements to produce more scarcity within their occupation. More scarcity of medical doctors does increase doctors wages but it also increases the costs of doctor visits. This privilege has priced health care out range for a large swath of the population, which gives government an excuse to pillage the middle class to help pay for the increased costs to the poor who are priced out of health care. The medical establishment loves this occupational licensing intervention because it allows them to dig deep into the pockets of the middle class for money that they couldn't get their hands on otherwise.

 

You never present any facts to be disputed. You present your opinions, and they are too silly and wacky to bother about.

And that's a fact!

 

What law and be specific gives them an advantage you can't afford?

 

And many of the wealthy become poor, let's not forget it's a two way street.

 

I'm not a 'lawyer', but I'm an American and I've paid attention to how things work (a pattern of outcomes observed).

I'm surely not fooled by fancy legal intricacies; I realize some are 'dazzled' or distracted by the same.

The wealthy get so many legal and financial advantages (that working people do not)... it's virtually IMMORAL.

It really does need to change.

 

Well either they make more through investing it which creates jobs or they spend it all like the left wants them to do to create jobs and go broke, but who is demanding you respect them simply because they have money?

- - - Updated - - -

Quote Originally Posted by Bluesguy View Post
What law and be specific gives them an advantage you can't afford?

Well if it takes a lawyer to know and you are not a lawyer then you are just blowing smoke. The fact is you don't have to be a lawyer and you are still blowing smoke if you cannot cite the specific laws of which you speak that give them an advantage over you.