The Rich Are Not Like the Rest Of Us…

Source, please.

 

Copyrights and patents are not rightful property but only legal privileges issued and enforced by government. Without them, Bill Gates might have become a wealthy man, but his wealth would be orders of magnitude less than it is. Almost all his wealth is the result not of creating value himself, but of pocketing publicly created value, and not paying justly for it. Just as is the case with almost all rich, greedy takers.

 

Less honest and more brutal people do, too, so your"smarter" is not necessarily true.

There is no reason that Bush the Lesser should make more money than Patty Murray, or that John Wayne made more than Eddie Albert.

(Hell, that proves you don't even need to be much of a man to get rich.)

 

The conservatives and neoconservatives must cling to the belief that the rich and powerful are good, fair-minded, and Holy creations of their benevolent God.

The right-wingers constantly deny the facts proven by many studies, that it is the malevolent greed and lust for power that motivate the very rich.

It is the very same reason that, despite their millions or billions in wealth, many of these individuals must have more and more, and the only source for this addition wealth is the middle and lower income segment of the population.

No, it is not hard work and intelligence that is redistributing the bulk of U.S. wealth upward, it is corruption and thievery.

 

What law says this? You find one law that treats rich people better then the poor, and I will find one that discriminates against rich people, and we can continue this until one gives up and claims the other right. Ready?

It is not conservatives that fear the 1% We are fine buying their goods, and happy with all the people they hire.

What businesses are evil? (That do not make their money from government) What Fortune 500 business can increase their labor costs by 30% and not run at a loss?

The leftists will jump at any opportunity to blame all their problems on the 1%, an your post is a perfect example.

Here is a fun one for you though. San Francisco has the highest amount of 1%s in the country. It is deep in debt, and the middle class is fleeing, more rich are moving there. Democrats have run it for a very long time. How again are conservatives against normal people? These people are leaving and moving to more conservative districts then blue ones. Why can't you balance a budget with that many 1%ers?

- - - Updated - - -

It has nothing to do with how smart you are. Tyson was paid and was a moron. It has to do with how unique your skill sets are. Tyson was one in 10 million, etc..

 

Don't be concerned with facts that disprove your beliefs. Traditionally, right-wingers ignore facts and statistics that go against their agenda to cater to the super rich. Conservatives and neoconservatives, like yourself, have made it clear for many years their absolute belief that they are substantially inferior in ambition and intelligence to the very rich. That they deserve no respect from the one percent, and owe their very existence to the mighty job creators.

Fortunately, people of reason understand the reality that exists in the United States and most other developed countries. The right wing belief that the world belongs to those whose viciousness enables them to exploit the weaknesses in others has been disproven on many occasions.

How many great societies of the past destroyed themselves due to the hubris of the wealthy, coupled with the support of their lackeys. Eventually, the masses revolt. The U.S. is rapidly reaching that point, but the conservatives and neoconservatives refuse to face this truth.

 

All laws that create privilege.

LOL! You really think that is meaningful? I show you a law that gives the rich $10T, and you show me a law that takes $10 away from them, and you claim the laws come out even???

Disgraceful.

Almost all businesses make their money from government one way or another.

I see. So in what you are no doubt pleased to call your "mind," there is no such thing as an injustice that profits the rich...

San Francisco is not permitted to tax the 1%. It has been prohibited from doing so by the state constitution since 1978, when Proposition 13 passed. San Francisco, like all local communities in CA as well as the state government, is forced, by Proposition 13, to give massive, growing, and unsustainable welfare subsidies to landowners, especialy the wealthiest of them, like large corporations.

 

If your argument is we should cut out government favoritism I agree. A limited small government is ideal.

 

"Copyrights and patents are not rightful property..."

Taxcutter says:
Since when? Without some intellectual property rights no one would ever innovate.

 

lol. You never answered john's question.

. Instead we get a bunch of left wing class warfare propaganda.

 

who makes th most on the rig, the roughneck or the geologist?

 

the eye of the needle isn't a litteral needle, it's a low gate on what was the outer wall of the city. camels could pass though it, but not if their burden was loaded too high.

 

how so?

book, verse, chapter. If you were well versed in Biblical literature, you'd at least know to give that much.

 

no one ever won an arguement with a customer..except for Mike Satkowiak.

 

Intellectual property.

 

bs. Your idea is that w/o government protections he couldn't have had the rights to his products and ideas, but protection of property rights is the basic function of government. If the government protecting those made HIM rich, why didn't it make you rich? Because you don't have the ideas he had.

So no, you're wrong. The government didn't make Bill Gates rich.

 

There is only a legal right to intellectual "property", which due to obvious historical examples needs no further explanation why that is a worthless justification. Fact is, the ideas, the impulses in my brain, are mine. I didn't take them from you as you still have yours. You're trying to tell me they are rightfully yours if you hold some intellectual "property". Are you going to claim that you own a part of my body when you hold intellectual property? Well, then come over here and carve them out of my brain yourself. It's a completely illogical concept.

Intellectual property is nothing but a legal privilege of preventing others from competing with you. What made Bill Gates obscenely rich, just like what makes every other intellectual property holder richer than they deserve, is intimidation, tyranny, or let's just call it mind control, to prevent others from applying knowledge to their environment because competition is an inconvenience to the intellectual property holder. On the other hand, the intellectual property holder was able to make use of thousands of years of human knowledge. It's such hypocrisy.

 

Since humanity first existed.

Why even bother making such fatuous, stupid, and dishonest claims? It is self-evident and indisputable that people innovated for millions of years before any intellectual property rights existed, so you are already known to be objectively wrong.

 

Fact.

Wrong. He would have had the rights to HIS products and ideas, but not the rights to ideas in other people's heads.

But intellectual "property" is a privilege, not a right, which is why it was inconceivable to our ancestors who nevertheless had perfectly functional governments.

Sure, just as government making some crooked land speculator rich doesn't make me rich because I don't own the land and politicians he owns. So what? It's still government that makes them rich. Government making crooked grafters rich doesn't make me rich because I don't have the connections or the lack of scruples they have. So what? It's still government that makes them rich.

You know this.

No, he is objectively correct.

Blatant non sequitur fallacy, as proved above.

 

I wonder how many years we are behind where we would be without intellectual property stifling progress.

 

Decades, minimum.

 

Roy L covered it, as did I, but your misconception of reality, like that of most right-wingers, put my answer to John's question well beyond the understanding of, what appears to be, your limited thinking.

Like you, your right wing brethren do not look at history, not even recent history that proves just how out of touch with reality the conservatives and neoconservatives have become. The massive evidence that shows just how corrupt the U.S. system of capitalism has become since the proclamations Lord Reagan sent down from the mountain (the snake oil called Reaganomics) is ignored by the right-wingers.

Ever since King Ronny decided government was evil (which actually means only programs that benefit the average Americans are evil), middle and lower income Americans have suffered. During these same three decades, the right-wingers’ beloved one percent has seen their wealth quadrupled and their portion of the nations total wealth increase considerably.

Everyday on these message boards, conservatives and neoconservatives demand our economic system be redesigned to further benefit the very rich at the expense of all other citizens. Additionally, the extreme right wing insists on the elimination of government regulations over Big Business that protect the environment, workers’ rights, consumers’ rights, and the rights of small investors.

But they never explain how all of this smaller government, with its further deregulation and tax cuts for the one percent and Big Business will improve life for the 99%. Their only offerings are vagaries and flights of fantasy that greatly distort or completely ignore human nature.

So far, all of the deregulation and tax cuts that have taken place for the past thirty years, which have given the super rich and Big Business record prosperity, have done nothing but hurt the average Americans (the 99%). Included in the damage to the average people are the loss of millions of jobs due to outsourcing, wage stagnation as the cost of living increases, underemployment that forces growing numbers of families with working parents onto the food stamp rolls, and ever-shrinking tax base that increases the burdens on government safety net programs, an education system that cannot keep up with those in other developed nations, a dismal outlook for current and future college graduates, a decaying infrastructure (How many bridges HAVE collapsed in the past few years? How many more are at risk?) Do any of the right-wingers remember Reagan’s great idea to deregulate the Savings and Loan industry, and the many millions of their customers that lost most of their life savings? However, there were some that profited immensely from this deregulation, for example, George H.W. Bush’s son Neil did very well.

Conservatives and neoconservatives rarely understand balance, especially the balance necessary to keep an economy thriving; and despite their beliefs of being a part of the one percent through loyalty to them, the right-wingers are, instead, a part of the 99% they despise.

The volumes of documentation that prove the economic model of the U.S. of the past thirty years is un-sustainable are readily available on the Internet. However, it is seen on these messages boards daily as conservatives and neoconservatives regularly dismiss research and its findings done by qualified experts in economics, science, political science, sociology, and most other fields that study the problems faced by most of the 300 million average American people.

 

Like i said left wing big government propaganda. ...and what "qualified" economics experts advocate liberal big government "solutions"? Liberals and economics don't mix.

 

" It is self-evident and indisputable that people innovated for millions of years before any intellectual property rights existed..."

Taxcutter says:
Hogwash!

If they had no way to get paid for innovation, why would they innovate?

Where do you get these fairy tales? MoveOn.org?

 

Are you suggesting that, after you used windows 8, you had 'the idea' to create windows 8 entirely on your own, and should now have the right to reproduce and sell it?

Intellectual property laws are the only thing that protects the rights of inventors. Imagine you're an inventor, you invent a new car engine that runs on air and is less expensive than the Tesla car. You bring it to Ford Motor Company, who rejects your idea. You bring it to GM, who rejects your idea. You bring it to Toyota, who rejects your idea. So sad. But then the next day, all three announce a new car they are designing that runs without gas.

Intellectual property laws are the only thing that encourage and protect innovators. Without them, there is no incentive for little guys to create new products, and there's no advantage for anyone else to innovate because they can't receive any rewards for it.

And no, Bill Gates didn't become rich because he intimidated his competition. He became rich because whatever product he created, he had exclusive rights to for a short time (in theory at least, intellectual property has a limited life), but his product was so far superior that his competition dropped off. But wait! There's more! Apple fell far behind Microsoft but was able to innovate and pick up a large portion of the market share, so why was this an exception? Did Bill Gates just not be a meanie to Microsoft and intimidate it? pleeeeaaaz

Oh and, again, fyi, since you apparently don't know it, there is a limit to the duration of intellectual property rights. plant and facility patents are good for 20yrs, design patents (like computer programs) are good for 14 years. So if you want to use a computer program from 1989, go ahead - it's free and you can reproduce it. Have fun.