Printable View
Not at all. If somebody provides goods or services they have every right to expect to make a profit on them. What I deplore is when people or corporations amass so much power that they can influence politicians and judiciary to sculpt or interpret laws in such a way as to stifle competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by 555-04Q2
Given the level of self interest committed to maintaining what we have it's hard to envision a fix.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Meanwhile:News from The Associated PressQuote:
The wealth gap between younger and older Americans has stretched to the widest on record
That is called success!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave B
So in order to influence political change people need to work hard, become wealthy, buy political influence and so stifle competition which in turn helps them gain more money and more influence...?Quote:
Originally Posted by 555-04Q2
Until then there's always democracy I suppose :p
So you have absolutely no ideas, proposals, solutions. Just more b!tching and moaning. Great, just what we needed, thanks for the input. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
The idea appears to be get rich and buy influence then you can change things, until then quit moaning.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Where does moaning get you?Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Why do you seem to be against hard work, educating yourself, doing everything you can personally do to get ahead in life?
Honestly, since you refuse to answer my simple question (What would you do to "fix" the problem of income gaps?), I am left to speculate. My speculation turns to something along the lines that you want someone (government?) to do something (confiscate wealth?) about it. If it is that, how is that fair. If you have other ideas, please correct my misconception.
No confiscation of wealth but for example: how about start by paying their fair share of taxes and deny their special loopholes that permit them to cut curves that precisely protect them from again, contributing their fair share of taxes:Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Thirty Of America's Most Profitable Companies Paid 'Less Than Zero' In Income Taxes In Last 3 YearsThirty Of America's Most Profitable Companies Paid 'Less Than Zero' In Income Taxes In Last 3 Years: ReportQuote:
So you too have no objection to the endless march of the big chains on the high street, even if it brings about bland corporate uniformity everywhere one goes?Quote:
Originally Posted by 555-04Q2
What a depressing world some people seem to want to live in.
I have worked hard and educated myself, and haven't done badly. I still side with the protesters. What exactly is your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
You seem to have one definition of 'getting ahead in life' only — it has to be within the corporate system as it stands. At no time have you ever considered that some people might find the modern corporate world a depressing, not to say sometimes worrying, entity?
You are hardly bursting with them yourself, let's be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Hard work should be appropriately rewarded. An education should translate into better opportunity. But increasingly it does not, while those who have been promised that it will are becoming increasingly frustrated and angry.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
You want an answer to what you call a "simple" question, but there are no "simple" answers. There are steps that could be taken, addressing corporate greed & abuse of position might be one, but we're told that will cripple economic recovery. Giving private enterprise the freedom to create wealth is the way out of this "mess" apparently but excuse me if that doesn't fill me with confidence.
Why do you think we have seen an increasing number of "occupy" protests?Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
You're too old-fashioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Ever met a trader? The guy on the floor who actually buys and sells shares and makes a handsome commission? These guys are hardly educated. The banks specifically go for guys who haven't been to university as they are cheaper and don't need to think, they just need to have a knack for good timing.
Most are highly unpleasant yobs high on cocaine looking for the next rush.
These guys get bonuses of hundreds of thousands for essentially clicking at a screen and calling up all day.
Meanwhile people in 'normal' trades and businesses slave away for pay packages that are gradually declining in value.
Yet its the latter that are perceived to be bailing out the former, keeping them in a job. See where there might be some resentment building up?
It doesn't surprise me that the main protests are in NY and London, the two cities where the financial sector have completely skewed the property market to make it unaffordable for those with normal jobs.
These protests aren't just about layabouts wanting more for nothing, its a legitimate protest against a financial sector that is causing damage to the livelihoods of the rest of the society and economy, yet behaves as if it didn't have any constraints at all, buying politicians at whim.
I am by no means badly off but my sympathy lies with those on the streets.
Because most are, or are as wealthy as trust fund babies who have the money and time to kill.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
So you don't call it confiscation of wealth you call it "paying their fair share". Ok I'll play along. How much more would you like "the rich" to pay. Earlier I linked to an article that spelled out how even if you tax "the rich" at over 100%, you will still not come anywhere close to balancing the budget. So what exactly is "their fair share"?Quote:
Originally Posted by race aficionado
I'm fine with elimiating loop holes, if needed to "get" those evil companies. But you do realize that corporations don't actually pay taxes, they pass them on to consumers.
If I do not want what the big chain stores offer, I simply do not buy it. It seems that many people do want what the chain stores offer, otherwise they wouldn't exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Hmmmmm. So you don't want choice, but you also don't want bland depressing chain stores. What exactly are you advocating? Taking many people's choices away, so that we are left with the one that you would like instead?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I do not think that the only definition of "getting ahead in life" is to be in the corporate system. I have never said that. I know many people who live "off the grid". They're quite happy. I know many lower middle class to poor folks who are quite happy in their lives. Heck I would consider myself smack dab in the middle of middle class, and I'm pretty happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
The difference is that I and most people I know don't go around protesting how "unfair" the system is, or how we should "get the rich", or even tax them more. The people I know are not jealous of what others have.
But I am not the one claiming that there is a problem that needs solving.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Ok how do you address corporate greed and abuse? A government program that will be full of greed and abuse so fast that it'll make your head spin?Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Why does freedom scare you?
The triumph of the bland, lowest-common-denominator majority. What a splendid thing to aim for.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
You may deny it, but this is what you are advocating — the natural conclusion of your arguments.
Oh boo hoo some jerk "just clicks a screen all day, and makes more than me". It's just not fair, sombody give me what he's got. What is stopping you from doing exactly what that guy is doing? And yes I do know a couple of traders, one in Chicago and two in Toronto.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malbec
Sorry to be harsh. But I just happen to believe in personal responsibilty, not jealous wailings of "fairness".
Chuck- you are arguing with people who responses are the equivalent of little kids going-- Yeah but what if-- well what it-- OK but what if-- Yeah but what if-if-if-if- if-if-if....Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
-------------------------------------------
They want to cry about the wealthy but ignore facts about the wealthy who supposedly support greater taxes.
Tax the rich! Buffett beclowns himself again | Washington Times Communities
Wow we're stuck in a time warp here. Didn't we already discuss this?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
How am I arguing for the "bland, lowest-common-denominatior". Sure you may not be able to find exactly what you want on the high street, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist off the high street, in the back alleys, on the internet, etc.
Why are you dead set on imposing you ideas of non-blandness on people. Obviously many people have made a consious decision to shop at those stores. What gives you the right to tell those people they are wrong?
A quick note, Chuck. No right-wing American will ever convince a liberal-minded European — or indeed many intelligent Europeans who lean somewhat to the right — by deploying as an argument the trite sense of the word 'freedom' so beloved of you and your ilk. We recognise it for what it is — a vacuous slogan parroted by those arrogant enough to believe that the conservative American way is the only true definition of freedom, and who believe that those who are even mildly critical of the free market are in some way dangerous saboteurs hell-bent on introducing revolutionary socialism.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
I understand that. Call me crazy but I actually like debating especially since for the most part this has been kept fairly civil. I find it fun, and it helps to re-inforce and strenthen my ideas/standards/philosophy. If we only talk about things with people of like mind, our arguments get weak. And I get bored. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
Yes, but we seem to have come round to it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Who said anything about imposing? I believe that not following the herd is a positive trait and should be encouraged, but if you wish for everything to be subsumed into a soulless corporate morass, so be it. Don't be surprised if not everyone is over-enthusiastic, and if it results in some protest.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Forgive me for addressing Arrows, and asking him why giving corporations freedom scares him. I didn't realise that was "off limits".Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Says the man who once memorably posted the contribution: 'Go bunky-troll on! Drink chug-a-lug-drink-chug-a-lug...'Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
OH YEAH, well the IRS always like you best!Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
You still seem to have trouble with what I am saying. I've said it at least 3 times now. Here it is again for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
If you personally do not like what the chain stores on the high street have to offer, you do not have to buy what they are selling. There are plenty of other places you can obtain what you are seeking. Obviously there are many many people who do want to buy from those chain stores. Who are you to tell them they are wrong?
Ah, so corporate blandness will lead to protests? That must be why there are so many Apple products down at OWS. :D
I didn't realise I was in any way suggesting it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
????? What does that mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
Sigh.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Of course I have trouble with it, because you seem unwilling to understand that, increasingly, there are not so many other places where one can obtain what one seeks — a natural consequence of the march of 'corporatisation'.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
As for your last point, maybe one should ask why Apple is a company not viewed with the same venom as much of the corporate world.
Why does giving government freedom scare you then?Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Somewhere in this discussion is the question of governance and power.
I find it a little strange that you object to government having a degree of governance and power when government can and should be held accountable because the executives of government are elected officials.
Whereas you have no problem at all when governance and power sits with largely unelected officials (in the context of broad society) making decisions in the corporate world.
The decisions of Wall St have far more of a degree of actual influence on people's livelihoods. How much responsibility should be laid at Wall St for the global financial crisis, and/or when the decision is taken to shift production plants to different cities or countries, the corporate world takes no responsibility whatsoever for the people's lives that its just ruined.
All praise the corporate world, give them freedom. Yet at the same time restrain governments?
Oh I could do the same job, I'm perfectly aware of that thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
You missed my point though or I suspect you did get it but refused to answer.
The fact is that the financial sector is disproportionately well paid to the extent that it skews local and national economies. In your country and mine it is now state subsidised and partially state owned at great cost to the entire population. Yet it still carries on behaving the way it did with impunity in the way that got it into great trouble in the first place.
Do you not think that major reform of the financial sector is necessary to make it more accountable, and to reduce the impact it has on the economy when it goes wrong due to mismanagement?
Your debate with others on whether the free market is a good thing is missing the point IMO.
A degree of governance and power that, no matter what those with a benevolent view of the free market may claim, is not vested in the hands of consumers. The behaviour of News International, to name but one example, proves that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Not being a money-obsessed ****?Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
I'll repeat the context in which I used the word freedom. Giving private enterprise the freedom to create wealth is the way out of this "mess" apparently but excuse me if that doesn't fill me with confidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Why doesn't that fill me with confidence? Because private enterprise, as represented by the financial services sector, has illustrated a level of incompetence that we are paying for, some more than others.