Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
we’re all better off when the market rises pete. no one is inherently better off if the market crashes.
sorry, comrade, you’re not holding any cards here.
as to the gap in wealth, as i’ve said
it might not be fair, but it’s not bad either. not unless you’re dumb enough to believe that one persons wealth causes someone else’s poverty. no one would be better off if wealthy people stopped creating more wealth for themselves. Bill Gates’ net worth has absolutely nothing to do with my ability to seek financial security. Zip.
Is that all you have? Orange Man Bad, wealth inequality somehow “causes” poverty, any other liberal
bumper sticker slogans you got?
Earth to Pete...if oprah winfrey earns another million today, that does NOT mean there’s a million left for us to scrounge for. It doesn’t work that way, wealth is not finite like a pizza. Plus, she’ll pay some taxes on that million, she’ll spend some, she’ll
invest some, shell
give some to charity, ALL of which help the economy and lessen the burden on regular folk.
Take off the tin foil hat, wipe the crazed foam off your
mouth, stop
howling at the moon, and think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
I cite an analyst at Goldman Sachs and you put words in my mouth and claim that I have a tinfoil hat and somehow revert to your usual rant that wealth inequality is good, has no effect on opportunity, a non-issue, Oprah's got money, things will trickle down or something.
If you again are off on this track to a trainwreck, explain how control of the factors of production has no consequence, perhaps you should tell the professors in Economics 101.
They would tell you that all business requires Land, Labor and Capitol.
If you control one of these you can control markets and dominate them, perhaps you have an alternate business theory?
The wealthiest people in the world are gaining more control of the capital market and it is clearly evident if you look at the data.
Do you think that the distribution of wealth is not changing?
Do you think controlling capitol is inconsequential?