Wake UP America....

Submitted by: ElectricEye 4 years ago in

Wealth Inequality in America.
There are 90 comments:
Male 425
i stopped when he said "ideal distribution" shut up. If you don`t like capitalism then move. The world hates americans because even our most poor indigent (relative to the rest of the population) people live better than a majority of the rest of the planet. Not my fault. You can always just move here; legally or otherwise; now the natural borns have to respect them "illegals".... fml a world based on economic equality means no choices; don`t you understand!?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]But how about a wealthy class that is only rich enough to live very, very comfortably but not rich enough to sock away millions and millions (in some cases billions) of extra money they will never finish spending and won`t do charitable acts with? [/quote]
What the hell do you think these people do with their money, fill up a room with $100 bills and wallow in it naked? They INVEST it in stocks, bonds, banks, venture capital, etc., thus making it available to entrepreneurs to build companies that produce valuable and desired products and services, and thus create jobs.

When capital is controlled by the private sector, we get Apple, Amazon, and Ford. When capital is controlled by socialist central planners, we get Solyndra, Fannie Mae, and Trabant.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
lt633c-"NO ONE`s time is worth 25, 50 or 115 MILLION dollars a year."

Your opinion on the matter is neither required nor relevent.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
t633c-"How could a cereal stacker "significantly" affect the store`s success, so that he gets paid more ?"

Demonstrate that theres a better way to stack the cereal, or that he`d be a better asset to the company in another job. You know, impress the management.

The reason cereal stacking pays so little is pretty much a trained monkey can do it. Demonstrate that you`re worth more than a trained monkey.

t633c-"Most workers at Wally World can`t support a family, as most are part time employees earning just over minumum wage."

That`s because they have no job skill worth a salary it takes to support a family. They`re working jobs designed for high-school juniors because they have no marketable skills. If they did, they wouldn`t be stocking cereal.

It`s not the Walton`s fault they decided to raise a family with the inability to support them.
0
Reply
Male 1,111
I don`t get this talk from these lazy people demanding a revolution against the wealthy. Most wealthy people have worked very hard for their wealth or at least someone before them. Everyone has the same opportunities but no one takes it, they just want hand outs for the small amount of work they do.

It`s America for a reason, everyone has an opportunity. In another country with a caste system people accept their place and never grow out of it and they don`t complain that their are people more wealthy than themselves. But you`re right in the country of opportunity you should whine and complain that you`re not being treated fairly rather than go out and actually DO something.
0
Reply
Male 143
"As for workers, if their work contributes signficantly to the stores success, they get paid more. "
How could a cereal stacker "significantly" affect the store`s success, so that he gets paid more ?
How much more ? $.50 an hour? cuz we all know raises go up in increments of pennies, not dollars. How long before they get that raise if they work hard ? 6 months, a year ? How long till the next one ? Will they then get full time and be able to support their family ?
I`m not a kid, I`ve been around a while. Most workers at Wally World can`t support a family, as most are part time employees earning just over minumum wage. But the Walton`s live pretty good, selling products from China all these years. And that`s been my point, and is the point of the video that started all this. Top 2% are running away with the prize, and the middle class is no longer in the middle.
To answer your rhetorical question, if they don`t show up enough times, they get
0
Reply
Male 8,438
lt633c-"There is efficiency, attitude, attendance and an array of other qualities that make up a quality workforce. "

Let me let you in on a little known secret: If a worker is efficient, has a great attitude, has good attendance and `an array of other qualities`, they are NOT making minimum wage. They will get promoted, advanced and given raises..as the are an asset to the company.

If, on the other hand, you`ve been on a job for a while, and are still making minimum wage, chances are that you are not efficient, have a crappy attitude, lousy attendance and do not have an array of other qualities.

lt633c-"I am a middle manager, and I`ve never been so delusional to think that the job gets done because of ME. It`s them."

The job gets done because of everyone on the team. But, as a middle manager, who do you appreciate more? A quality, efficient worker with a good attitude? Or one who does not care and you`re lucky if he show`s
0
Reply
Male 8,438
lt633c-"Managers make sure there are shelves for the cereal."

Learn to read.
Owners/investors make sure there are shelves for the cereal, and cereal for the shelves.

Managers make sure the cereal is there in time to be placed on the shelves, and to make sure the store is staffed, the customers are happy and everything goes off without a hitch. They make sure the workers are properly trained (liability issues), make sure the store is as safe for all involved. They handle irate customers, belligerent workers and make sure the workers get paid.

Managers are also WORKERS, btw.

As for workers, if their work contributes signficantly to the stores success, they get paid more.

0
Reply
Male 143
"Without ownders and investors, Walmart would not exist"
Without workers and customers, Wally World, or any other cmpany wouldn`t exist.
And from what i`ve seen at Wally World, their managers could be replaced in a couple minutes too. Dumb as a bag of hammers.
About replacing stockers, or anyone else for that matter, there are more attributes than merelyplacing an item on the shelf. There is efficiency, attitude, attendance and an array of other qualities that make up a quality workforce. If you can replace them so easily, maybe you could attract better quality employees if you paid them a little more, let them work full time, and provide some benefits. Sounds reasonable to me.
I am a middle manager, and I`ve never been so delusional to think that the job gets done because of ME. It`s them. I`m there to support their efforts, provide guidance, eliminate obsticles, and empower them to solve problems.
0
Reply
Male 143
"Because some jobs do not contribute enough to the company`s profit to warrent that cost of labor. They`re forced to pay minimum wage...if your job only contributes a little over that, it`s not worth it to pay for healthcare (you DO realize that healthcare is not a `bonus`, but part of your salary...right?)

Yes, I know what compensation is. Many companies, not JUST Wally World, have eliminated full time positions replacing them with part time workers, taking away healthcare from those that would likely have it if they were full time.
This thread was about the top 2% compaired to middle class wages, not about store managers and floor moppers. However, it is arrogant for any middle manager to think that they are what makes any business run. Managers make sure there are shelves for the cereal. Ok, but the employees put together the shelves, get the cereal from the truck, (driven by a worker ) stock, price and ring up the cereal, while management stands around.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
t633c-"Remember the boycots and demostrations by the employees last year ?"

Oh, you mean those ATTEMPTED boycots and demonstrations that failed miserably, put on by so-called `workers rights` groups that had no affiliation with Walmart employees, who tried to get employes to demonstrate, and failed and who tried to get customers to boycot, and failed? Yeah, I remember it.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
t633c-"things" get accomplished by workers, not managers."

Cereal gets put on shelves by workers. The floors get mopped.

Managers make sure that truckloads of cereal are there to put on shelves. And also insure that the workers places it on the shelves. (you`d be amazed how difficult that is). And to insure the worker has a safe workplace.

The owners and investors make sure there are shelves for the cereal to rest on and for the worker to place them upon.

Without the stock boys...Walmart would have to go through the trouble of hiring new ones...might take all of two hours to find qualified workers..

Without the managers, Walmart would go the way of Kaufmann`s (remember those?).

Without ownders and investors, Walmart would not exist...which means all those jobs go bye-bye.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
t633c-"Why not all?"

Because some jobs do not contribute enough to the company`s profit to warrent that cost of labor. They`re forced to pay minimum wage...if your job only contributes a little over that, it`s not worth it to pay for healthcare (you DO realize that healthcare is not a `bonus`, but part of your salary...right?)
0
Reply
Male 143
"Almost half of Walmart workforce has company provided health insurance. "

Why is it "almost half"? Why not all?

"Upper management gets paid for accomplishing things"

"things" get accomplished by workers, not managers.

"while an overnight stocker can make up to $15 an hour..quite a bit more than minimum."

Yes, SOME CAN, but most don`t. Remember the boycots and demostrations by the employees last year ?

"There are many part-time jobs, not just at Walmart."

Yup, there are. I have one. But when the largest company in the US primarily employs people on a part-time basis to save money, it`s not taking care of the people that DO THE WORK, to make them billionaires. Again, remember the employee demostrations last year ?

I can accept company owners making profits, but Walmart is a prime example of the rich getting richer, and the poor declining, not even k
0
Reply
Male 143
jops360 - Exactly how it`s happened. Well said. The fact legislation was just signed in to law to prevent "insider trading" by our Congress is proof of the bullsh*t they`ve been pulling for decades.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
lt633c-"yet their employees are low paid"

Walmart pay varies. The pharmacist make up to $155K a year, while an overnight stocker can make up to $15 an hour..quite a bit more than minimum.

But, at ANY employer, if you`re doing menial work you`re going to make menial pay.

lt633c-"mostly part time"

There are many part-time jobs, not just at Walmart.

lt633c-"with no healthcare benefits"

Almost half of Walmart workforce has company provided health insurance. Amazingly enough, the number of Walmart employees who use public-assistance health-care is almost exactly that as other retailers employees, and in similar numbers as the population as a whole.

lt633c-""Teir compensation have no kept pace with Walmarts` upper management."

Upper management gets paid for accomplishing things. A floor sweeper pretty much sweeps floors. Someone who does MORE than sweeps floors soon is in
0
Reply
Male 689
honky lips- good luck with that. account for inflation you will need to triple what you are putting away. not to mention, dont get sick. medical bills will strip you of every penny you have.
0
Reply
Male 689
keggar- you obviously have never been poor. and these kings and queens didnt have running water, electricity, proper sanitation, or medicine. believe it or not there are people TODAY that live in the US with the conditions. im not going to say they stole the money, they just tricked the stupid, enacted laws into their favor, and bought power. communism/socialism fail due to greed. there is always a person in power and they take advantage of that power. that is the problem and that was why the US was different. although now its becoming more and more communism. money buys power, power allows those to control the masses and controlling us is how the rich stay rich and tell us that its bad to to notice the obvious class warfare that they started. the only freedom we have is what they allow. if it doesnt make them money they dont want it and we dont get it.btw, the flames are not going away by denying the truth. remember this, you are only an accident away from becoming poor yourself.
0
Reply
Male 143
Ok, lets look at actors.....yes, there is skill involved, but it`s certainly not "hard work", or "dangerous". In my career, I`ve seen better acting from criminals and crack whores than I`ve seen in some movies. Yet, they`re compensated with 10`s of millions of dollars, and head home, in the limo, to their 12 million dollar homes, just in time to change into their $5000 suit, hop in the Bentley, and head out to the 5 star restaurant. Why? Because YOU pay for it, and what you do to earn the money is real. Real fire fighters, cops, nurses, construction workers, lawyers ( nevermind, f*** lawyers )store clerks, not in the safety of a movie set or CGI screen. No, actors are not in the top 2%, but they are way over compensated to "play" someone else for a few months a year.
0
Reply
Male 143
Bakcagain21 - The Walton family is a perfect example of what this video is taking about. ALL of the Waltons at BILLIONAIRES, yet their employees are low paid, mostly part time, with no healthcare benefits. Teir compensation have no kept pace with Walmarts` upper management. Yes, I did mention that NO ONE`s time is worth millions, but they do own the company. The real problem, the point bought by the video, is the fact that the rest of the emloyees, who do the real work make sh*t. That`s the problem. As for caps on compensation, i`m not sure that is gonna happen. It`s just wrong that the top 2% just keep getting richer, and we all pay for it with higher prices, more expensive tickets to sports and music venues, etc. "The fat man`s busy dancin` while the thin man pays the band".
0
Reply
Male 663
Is this not the 80:20 rule in action.
0
Reply
Male 54
Our "poor" live lives so rich that even kings and queens of yesteryear could not imagine. Can we acknowledge this and be grateful? Gratitude is the medicine that will heal our nation rather than some class dividing president who keeps picking at imaginary self imposed wounds. One person being super wealthy does not mean that some how he stole it from a another. Wealth is not limited it is created and expanded by anyone willing to pursue it. Communism/natzism/socialism fail miserably every time they are tried. Government attempts at wealth redistribution are nothing more than fraudulent theft to buy power. It is an assault on freedom. Lastly. This film is a boat load of gutter tripe and the erroneous attitudes it projects and fans the flames of will lead to the destruction of our the greatest nation on earth.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
FoolsPrussia: We are all living better now than in the 50s and 60s. Better housing, cars, healthcare, more food and disposable income.

Where we are lacking, compared to then, is in morality, education and employment.
0
Reply
Male 1,243
The future of that nation is already well known...
0
Reply
Male 560
@lt633c "And CEO`s aren`t the only problem. NO ONE`s time is worth 25, 50 or 115 MILLION dollars a year. NO ONE`s abilities are THAT good that they deserve rediculous compensation. Actors? No. Athletes? No. Musicians ? No. Sorry, nobody is worth that kind of money. I don`t care what they do."


If that`s what you think, but when people are free to spend their money on what they want. And spend it in Walmart amounting to a couple of cents profit for every American who purchases something in that store. How do you stop them being paid that without setting saving`s cap`s or wage caps and dictating what everyone is allowed to own or make according to the state.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"It takes a rich bastard to build a tractor factory."

But how about a wealthy class that is only rich enough to live very, very comfortably but not rich enough to sock away millions and millions (in some cases billions) of extra money they will never finish spending and won`t do charitable acts with?

I don`t know why non-wealthy people feel the need to defend wealthy people. You know you`ll never become one so why defend the case for obscene wealth obtained at the expense of other people`s basic existence?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
What a bunch of socialist claptrap. If it weren`t for the wealthy, we`d all still be subsistence farmers working our own little patch of dirt with a mule and a hand-forged plow.

It takes a rich bastard to build a tractor factory.
0
Reply
Male 143
And CEO`s aren`t the only problem. NO ONE`s time is worth 25, 50 or 115 MILLION dollars a year. NO ONE`s abilities are THAT good that they deserve rediculous compensation. Actors? No. Athletes? No. Musicians ? No. Sorry, nobody is worth that kind of money. I don`t care what they do.
0
Reply
Male 143
Over the last 30 years, wages of the middle class have not kept pace with wages and perks of the top 20%. (CEO`s etc) During the same time, an unholy alliance has developed between the federal government and big business, banks and wall street. Nothing but dirty business going on therer. And the part that makes me feel better is this. None of them are any better than any of us. Matter of fact, when people like them can`t handle their lives, or a situation, they call people like us. I don`t have a "fix" for the way it is, but I do know that it isn`t right.
0
Reply
Male 676
I`ve seen this before. It`s time for a revolution. The saddest thing anyone can do, is dismiss this information. Do we really think of ourselves as being that insignificant? You`re talking about people most of whom don`t work hard for their exorbitant amount of money.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"Which was then lowered in the 60s and 70s."

Still higher than today, and it`s essentially been falling ever since.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]The top tax rate was much higher in the 50s, as was the corporate tax rate.[/quote]

Which was then lowered in the 60s and 70s.
0
Reply
Male 1,586
Meh, I say good for that 1%. I invest and I already have a pretty nice nest egg set aside for when I retire. I know I`ll never make it to that 1% but I do know that in 30 years I`ll have enough set aside that I`ll be able to retire and live comfortably.
0
Reply
Male 2,672
Complain about CEO pay all you want but if you took 90% of their salaries away and gave it to the poor it would only be a half of a drop in the bucket.

Taking from the haves and giving it to the have nots isn`t the answer. How many trillions have been given to the poor? Guess what, the problem remains.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"Fair enough but this wasn`t achieved through aggressive confiscation and redistribution. In fact most of FDR`s New Deal programs were terminated by the Truman admin."

Perhaps we have different definitions of "aggressive confiscation and redistribution." The top tax rate was much higher in the 50s, as was the corporate tax rate. That, to me, is a much more aggressive confiscation of income.
0
Reply
Male 4,859
This is what happens when you elect millionaires to the House and Senate - they change the rules and regulations so them and their friends get more of the pie.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
QueenZira-"Productivity has surged but income and wages have stagnated for most Americans."

That`s a quaint, but missleading, statement.

Yes, productivity has surged, mainly due to technology, but only in certain areas. But, a burger-flipper today is not more productive than a burger-flipper of 50 years ago.

There are many such jobs.
0
Reply
Male 4,099
@QueenZira: I`m not being ideological in anyway, these concepts can be found in any economic textbook you can find even in ones in communist countries like China. You`re correct that cost of living has gone up but that is in relation to inflation and the printing of money. I explained twice now why CEO`s are making more money. And in to your comment

"What did CEOs start doing in the `70s that justifies all the extra pay they get and all the suffering they cause for everyone else?"

A persons pay is not based on what is fair but on the demand for a job and the supply of people who have the ability to fill it. The reason they have become richer is because their companies are picking up the slack for the companies who have gone out of business. And the rich are not causing any suffering by being rich, the government is causing suffering by creating conditions that only large companies can adapt to.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Zira while I can`t agree with you on wages I certainly do think we need to wipe the tax code clean save for charitable donations and the progressive tax system (which I still disagree with but I`ll digress). As it stands it distorts economy, and encourages malinvestment. Government shouldn`t encourage people to buy some goods and services over others.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Look, you two are so ideological it`s impossible to dialogue with you. The cost of living has gone up, average wages for everyone but the top 1% have stagnated so no one can buy anything they need and a CEO gets more income than a average wage earner, over 30X times more. What did CEOs start doing in the `70s that justifies all the extra pay they get and all the suffering they cause for everyone else?

While you`re at it, why don`t you look at what the New Deal actually entailed and please please please for the love of Goddess learn what the hell Communism actually is.

The facts are there gentlemen, and I don`t have to cook up contrived excuses to explain them.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Your chart doesn`t say that wages have stagnated. If anything the productivity gains means that people can buy more and better goods and services than ever before. Not growing as fast as expected does not mean stagnated. Your chart also displays the time frame in which I mentioned economic mobility.
0
Reply
Male 4,099
@QueenZira: I explained why the rich are getting richer in my 3rd post.
In the 1970s family-owned businesses comprised between 45 and 50 percent of the countries retailers. Today their share has fallen to below 20 percent. As operating costs have risen, independent businesses have gone out of business and bigger and more durable companies have filled the void.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
This whole shebang about covers it. Particularly note where it says, "Productivity has surged but income and wages have stagnated for most Americans. If the median household income had kept pace with the economy since 1970, it would now be nearly $92,000 not $ 50,000".

Oh and lest I forget, something dedicated to all you passionate Red hunters out there, classic folk Americana, from middle America with love.
0
Reply
Male 4,099
And by increasing taxes on anyone past 35% of total income on the rich, middle, or poorer classes, the total revenues from the tax begin to decrease, its known as the "region of declining revenue." It`s occurs because of more incentive traps, demotivation, corruption, and increasing inefficiencies as income taxes increase.

You would only be cutting your nose to spite your face. It would hurt you more than it helped.

0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote] Income distribution in America was much closer to being equal during the years the USA was most concerned with fighting communism.[/quote]

Fair enough but this wasn`t achieved through aggressive confiscation and redistribution. In fact most of FDR`s New Deal programs were terminated by the Truman admin.
0
Reply
Male 4,099
The reason the rich become richer during times of economic stress is due to many businesses going out of business and the slack is taken up by bigger more durable companies. When local produce shops close their doors, companies like Walmart takes up the slack. On a global scale this can be exponential. Combine this with market instability and the wealthier companies and people prefer to have more liquid funds and less investitures increasing personal wealth but limiting personal investment. Things like taxes, price of goods, filing government forms, hiring lawyers and accountants, the AHA, and raising minimum wage, all increase operating costs, not just on the rich but everyone. Smaller mom and pop shops often are the first fall when operating cost increase. As they do larger corporations make a profit due to their ability to fill the void left by the smaller companies closing. Thereby, further enriching the top companies like Walmart, and the top 1% who run them.
0
Reply
Male 4,099
We should not take from other merely because merely because they have more than us, we all on this site have way more than others in the world. The only way we could redistribute this much money is through taxation and government redistribution. That is not even socialism that is full blown communism. When a tax is applied, economist are taught to think of it as a penalty. It reduces the quantity of goods and increases the price, and again forces a dead weight loss.
As I have said before economics, taxation and revenues are a clinically defined mathematical sums based on thousands of years of market study, not a generalized feelings of quality like "fairness" or "what should be". I understand the argument but it isn`t reasonable, it would hurt more people than it helped.

If you don`t believe me ask yourself why the rich are getting richer and wealth is becoming skewed.
0
Reply
Male 4,099
This I disagree with this video and it`s notions of fairness. This graph only shows the wealth income distribution in America, and people look at it and say how can those top 20% and top 1% make so much more than the middle and poorer classes. YET IF YOU MAKE MINIMUM WAGE YOU ARE ALREADY PART OF THE TOP %12 ON EARTH!!! Even if you are poor here you have it better than most people on earth. If you want to see what real poverty looks like look at places like Zimbabwe when the average monthly wage is $0.30, that`s a cent a day, that`s what real poverty looks like. How fast do you make 30 cents at your job?

People who are poor in this country are poor relative to other people in the US not the world. Even if you have no job, and $0 income, you can still get welfare, state assistance, subsidized housing, food stamps, soup kitchens, independence cards, public library`s with free internet, and numerous other social-services.
0
Reply
Male 496
oh yeah I forgot; PINKO!
0
Reply
Male 496
Sorry won`t work, you could redistribute all the wealth equally and in a year for the most part the poor would be poor again, and the rich would be rich again.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote] The argument that the poor are paying for the rich doesn`t hold up.[/quote]

Not to disagree with you in principle, but in ways they are. Low wage workers pay taxes that fund HHS programs. The department itself is the biggest driver of government debt.

[quote] Society hummed along pretty well.[/quote]

Yes and there were Jim Crowe laws, separate but equal, world wars, lack of women`s suffrage. Wait a minute I thought the gilded age was among the worst times in American history.

Zira

Since WHEN have wages started stagnating? In the past 40 years 19 out of 20 of those who made money in the bottom bracket have moved up. Those who started in poor households made double and those in rich made about the same. I don`t understand where you`re getting this "factoid".
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"Supposed `Wealth Equality` is called communism. That`s been tried and failed."

Hyperbole. Income distribution in America was much closer to being equal during the years the USA was most concerned with fighting communism.


Annual U.S. income share of the top 1%
0
Reply
Male 1,084
lol "not the janitor"
0
Reply
Male 8,438
fancythat-"That`s 76%!"

Not to mention, 7 out of every 6 people are bad at fractions.
0
Reply
Male 1,949
That`s a lot of stats you`re throwing around. And we all know that 76% of all stats are made up on the spot. That`s 76%!
0
Reply
Male 560
@Chalket Seriously answer this one simple question and I will admit I`m wrong. It`s the only point I`m making, nothing else which you`re implying I`m saying.

If people/companies are freely allowed to save/invest their money and pass onto the next generation. And others are allowed to spend their money. How do you stop the gap between the former saving over many years and the latter not?
0
Reply
Male 560
@chalket Apple is given as an example of a company which said stuff Shareholders and shareholder maximization. It became the richest company in the planet. At one point having more money on hand then the US federal government. The things suggested will not stop people being able to amass wealth. It will perhaps make companies more competitive and remove market distortions by regulation and outside influence. But better run companies over generations they will still have amassed more wealth unless you cap how much someone can save/earn.

Another great example of how to run a business is John Lewis in the UK where all the workers own the company in a worker cooperative. Should have more of them.

But it doesn`t stop people amassing large sums of wealth, as the basic problem is the capitalist system allows inequality. And you cannot without confiscating after imposing a limit stop that wealth amassing.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Supposed `Wealth Equality` is called communism. That`s been tried and failed.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@Bakcagain21
This good article from Forbes magazine addresses some of how you`re wrong.
0
Reply
Male 2,357
We have become so obsessed with how to rectify the current situation, that nobody is asking how we got here.

In my opinion, the main culprits were government interference in the housing market and the artificial manipulation of market interest rates during the early 2000`s. The collapse caused the recession, and with any recession, the wealthy tend to be better shielded from the effects of a down economy.

Next, I also tend to blame the government for overtaking the responsibility of an individual’s economic welfare. Decades ago, individuals and businesses were much more responsible for ensuring living wages since the government did not subsidize incomes as much as today. Today, businesses have been enabled to offer extremely low wages because the government will provide the subsidy.

Quite literally, tax redistribution plans help to further the wealth disparity.
0
Reply
Male 560
@chalket because wealth increases over generations as the world and globalization have gotten bigger. CEO`s 30 years ago weren`t running companies that were as big or operated in as many countries as they do now, they didn`t have as many customers. They hadn`t created their own supply chains to keep the cost downs and profit theirs)

And true some companies like those operated by Quakers (Cadbury and Bournville is a great example) head awesome coperate conscience, & some still exist in some modern companies just are the exceptions as they were back then.

Unless you eliminate any chance or inequality(capping savings, wages) , it will grow because you cannot stop a company or person from amassing wealth, then passing it onto their children/new board of directors for generations increasing the wealth. People are voluntarily giving money to them.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
chalket-"You act as if this is the way it`s always been and always must be."

Never said that. Never inferred that. (Do you realize that you demonstrate a propensity to argue through a bias of what you intentionally misinterpret rather than what is actually written?)

The only constant in the universe is change. The opposite of change is not entropy, but change in the opposite direction.

chalket-"There was a time when an owner/ceo of a company felt a social and moral obligation to his employees and to society at large."

And there was a time when the owner/ceo of a company used slave and/or child labor. Your point?
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@chalket

[quote]What makes todays ceo`s so much more valuable and important than they were 30 years ago? Why are they making 10-30x more now? Why are their workers making less than they used to? [/quote]

These are good questions and I share your sentiment that the current disparity is disconcerting; however, I think you are misled in your implications that greed is the cause. Is it likely that greed has grown so quickly in the past 30 years to be a reasonable explanation of this situation? I doubt it. Greed is a constant and, as such, should not be looked at as an explanation of an exceptional circumstance.

Rather, I imagine it is the fault of government interference in the market (I can elaborate if you`d like). Ask yourself this, was there more or less government oversight of the economy 30 years ago compared to today? I believe you will come to the same conclusion as I have.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
Stop fixating on the "ideal" and look at the reality! The "ideal" just illustrates how far reality really is from perception. The reality is unsustainable and harmful to life and liberty. How can you defend it?

You act as if this is the way it`s always been and always must be. Pure b.s. There was a time when an owner/ceo of a company felt a social and moral obligation to his employees and to society at large. A company was judged by longevity and long-term strategies, not immediate maximized profit. We had a strong and growing middle class, along with plenty of very wealthy people. Society hummed along pretty well. What makes todays ceo`s so much more valuable and important than they were 30 years ago? Why are they making 10-30x more now? Why are their workers making less than they used to?

They`ve been duping us for decades. Some of us are beginning to wake up, while others are a bit slower. Open your minds.
0
Reply
Male 560
And just to everyone who want`s to reallocate money by forcibly taxing savings or declaring how much people should earn in wages. I repeat this sentiment, if you and others can dictate what someone else is allowed to save/earn. What is stopping the same being said of you. Why you should always be wary of politicians who promise to spend other peoples money, they`ll have no problem spending yours on others aswell.

Look at Gordon Brown and the 10p tax rate debacle or raiding of the pensions or any number of policies to placate the middle classes.
0
Reply
Male 560
@piperfawn it`s the same in the UK as Mcgrendle just said , the tax burden is shared mainly by the rich. Hell they`re raising the income tax threshold to 10K (which I`m in favour of)

But the poor do not pay for the rich. When you consider the public services and who uses them compared with the rich who go for private education and private healthcare. The argument that the poor are paying for the rich doesn`t hold up.

And I agree with you tax evasion is a terrible thing but you cannot rely solely on the rich as they will move to another country which doesn`t tax them as much. Look at what`s happening in France. The best thing would be to heavily simplify the tax codes and rates to what is deemed "fair" by the government to eliminate these loopholes. The Hong Kong Tax code is 4 pages long and they have 95% compliance.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
piperfawn-"so the poor people have to pay for thems"

The IRS would dissagree with you.

Would you put `the poor` in the top 50% or the bottom 50%? As it seems that the top 50% pay 97.75% of the taxes...while the bottom 50% (of which `the poor` are only a small minority) pay 2.25%
0
Reply
Male 5,148
Bakcagain21 one part of the solution is to go and see where this 1% keep the money and how much they pay in taxes. Usually you discover they keep money in tax heavens states not payng a single penny of taxes ( so the poor people have to pay for thems). Solution? If you get someone that hide his money and elude taxes just arrest him, confiscate all his money and properties and deny him the possibility to have any pubblic charge (i.e they can`t be politician in any government,they can`t be also majors of a screwed town in middle of nowhere). This is just a part of the possible solution but could be a good start.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
Ah, America. Land of the overworked and under paid. Keep watching Fox news and gobbling up the propaganda. Your brainwashing cycle is almost complete!
0
Reply
Male 560
@chalket Once you agree to the prospect someone can work more hours for more money. Or have more money in their bank account by saving etc. You accept inequality in society and without state confiscation of property you cannot control to what extent that inequality will reach. As the saved money will be invested to get returns put to use to make more money and over generations and generations it builds up as this video has shown.
0
Reply
Male 560
@chalket I repeat how are you going to change this without state confiscation. The problem is if everyone changed their buying habit`s now and bought from different people etc performing a big cultural shift you will just create a different top layer amassing the wealth once they start to consolidate different enterprises.

And yes smoking is a wonderful example of how the state has dictated it. Taking tax money to run 30 years worth of campaigning against it, taxing the hell out of it, and creating situations like smoking bans to physically separate them as pariahs. Yet people still smoke as is their choice to damage their health. Once again it`s the state that has decided what is good for you and ran a 30 year campaign to change it.

Take wages do a 30 year campaign, of regulation and high taxation to bring down NFL wages as they don`t deserve their salaries. That`s what it will take and that`s too much power for the state.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
chalket-"you just think this inequality is fine and dandy, right?"

Not at all. I just realize the reality of how wealth is created and earned and why it is so.

This idiot didn`t present any FACTS of what `ideal` is. He presented what peoples` OPINION of what SHOULD be `ideal`.

I`m sure most people `think` the `ideal` price for gas is lower...that opinion in no way effects the reality.

chalket-"And you have the nerve to call 92% of Americans "the dumb people!"

Where did you get that I called 92% of Americans anything? (why is it idiots always throw up a strawman rather than arguing what was actually writtin?)

What I said is that if this `distribution` is news to you, you`re ignorant of easily accessible facts and also ignorant of the reality of the situation. I call these people `idiots`.

In other words, if the current wealth distribution is `news` to you, you`re an idiot.
0
Reply
Male 450
Sad.
Just think, we could fix the whole problem with a few dollars worth of bullets.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
This isn`t sustainable. This is going to hurt the next generation who are already on track to earn less in our lifetimes than our parents did no matter how much or how long we work due to wage stagnation. We can`t buy homes, we can`t pay for our education, and we can`t start families like this.

That old Reaganite delusion that enriching the wealthy makes *everybody* wealthy... It really works like letting the rich guy have his coffee, which he then proceeds to vomit in your mouth...

I repeat, this is not sustainable. It won`t go on forever. There won`t be violence or anything, but there is gonna be change as the world slowly rights itself.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@MeGrendel
Come on, you`re smarter than that. You always come on here defending the status quo, when that status quo is literally getting more and more skewed toward the top every day!

You have the gall to "correct" me when you apparently have no clue nor any curiosity about the REALITY this video so clearly illustrates. I notice you didn`t dispute the facts, you just think this inequality is fine and dandy, right? Yeah, right.

You claim "he`s frightened [me] into thinking" things? Let me assure you, a) I`m not frightened, I`m PISSED OFF, and b) "he" didn`t cause it; my own research (and the indisputable FACTS) is why I`m angry, it has nothing to do with this video. It`s just an excellent illustration of a major problem a lot of open minds have seen building for many years. Sorry your blinders get in your way. And you have the nerve to call 92% of Americans "the dumb people!" We should ALL be outraged by YOUR ignorance, du
0
Reply
Male 508
Now you know why they want to take away our guns. With all the rage against the 1% lately I`d say they`re pooping bricks.
0
Reply
Male 373
Hypocracy. People earning the poverty rate income in the US are in the richest 15% worldwide (yes, that`s after adjusting for differences in costs of living).

If people who made these videos were truly concerned with inequality, they`d advocate confiscating half the money from all Americans -- including poor Americans -- and giving it to the poor in developing countries.

Having said that, the poor`s problem isn`t that they are unequal. It is that they are poor.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
Just go on food stamps!!! 47% are living off the work of others because we`re "entitled" now to live off the backs of others. What could go wrong!!
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@Bakcagain21
We don`t have to have state control, it just takes a change of perception. Historically, social changes come about by pressure from within. Yeah, legislation often follows to codify the changes but it always starts with the people. Look at tobacco. Smoking was EVERYWHERE just 30 years ago, now smokers are looked down upon and shunned by a lot of society. When enough people become aware of this crazy economic reality and decide it is no longer acceptable, then pressure for change will begin to mount. It all starts with education, like this video. SHARE IT! :)
0
Reply
Male 8,438
chalket-"Now that you know how bad the problem is"

Correction: "Now that you know what the reality is and he`s frightened you into thinking it`s `unfair`."

chalket-"it is just meant to open some eyes and minds"

Correction: "it is just meant for making you afraid of it and telling you who`s to blame for it."

chalket-"If enough people come to this realization, change is possible."

The idiots this video is aimed at are only willing to do something when `change` can be accomplished by pushing the `like` button on facebook.

This entire video is basically "the dumb people THINK it is THIS way, but `fair` would be ANOTHER way, but the reality is THE OTHER way. Be outraged by your own ignorance!"
0
Reply
Male 8,438
Wealth it not supposed to be `distributed`. It is created and earned.

For one thing, he`s asking `how do you THINK it should be. The so-called `ideal` is just OPINION...not fact.

Why not ask `do you think anyone should get cancer`. The IDEAL would be, 0% should get caner. The reality is in no way effected by this OPINION.

It does not matter what anything thinks people `should` have, as it has nothing to do with the reality.

This idiot needs to quite throwing around words like `ideal` or `equitable`. They do not mean what he thinks they mean.

`Is the CEO working 380x the average worker`. Bogus argument. Wage is not calculated on a `work` unit alone.

turdburglar-"It shows a clear and simple perspective."

False arguments presented in a way to outrage simpletons.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@SnapsForMe
Wow, you want everything done for you? It`s not enough for a video to inform you, but you demand they give you step-by-step answers too? Now that you know how bad the problem is, why don`t you go on and educate yourself a bit more? Try getting active and you might just learn some things you can do. As for this video, it is just meant to open some eyes and minds, nothing else. As he says at the end, "all we need to do is wake up, and realize that the reality in this country is not at all what we think it is." If enough people come to this realization, change is possible.
0
Reply
Male 1,625
Blame Reganomics.
0
Reply
Male 39,614

"Wake Up America"
Nothing new here. We`ve all seen this info.
Most Americans are just too lazy to do anything.
0
Reply
Male 560
Swear I`ve seen this before...

Unless you want to have state control of wealth and redistribution how do you stop this. It`s voluntary transfers of money. No one put`s a gun to your head and forces you to shop at Walmart, but by doing so you are voluntarily giving money to the Walmart family. It`s the famous example of the basketball player. If everyone (100 people) starts out with 10$ and to watch the basketball player. They each pay 2$, he now has $208 dollars everyone else has $8.

Once you accept inequality, you cannot limit it without massive state interference. Then it get`s to the government deciding what you or anyone else should earn or have and what you`re allowed to spend your money on.
0
Reply
Female 217
Okay...and now that we`ve all been informed...what does this guy propose we do about it? I see so many videos complaining about the dreaded state of America and so few with a bright idea about how to fix it.
0
Reply
Male 4,891

I like this post. It shows a clear and simple perspective.
0
Reply
Male 4,163
didn`t we see this a few weeks ago
0
Reply
Female 1,478
"mind blown" So tired of that term :(
0
Reply
Male 2,729
Link: Wake UP America.... [Rate Link] - Wealth Inequality in America.
0
Reply