« prev   random   next »

1
1

Which distribution of wealth do you prefer?

By Heraclitusstudent following x   2019 Apr 29, 12:39pm 351 views   16 comments   watch   nsfw   quote     share    


Option #1:
- richest 20% owns 33% of the wealth.
- poorest 20% owns 10% of the wealth.

Option #2:
- richest 20% owns 84% of the wealth.
- poorest 20% owns 0.1% of the wealth.
1   d6rB   ignore (1)   2019 Apr 29, 12:42pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Less chance to get guillotines aka French revolution with #1
2   RC2006   ignore (0)   2019 Apr 29, 12:44pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

#3
richest 20% owns 30%
middle 21-79% own 70%
poorest 20% own nothing because they just drain. -%
3   NuttBoxer   ignore (2)   2019 Apr 29, 12:52pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The one where everyone gets their fucking hands out of my pocket, and let's me succeed for fail on my own.
4   jazz_music   ignore (7)   2019 Apr 29, 12:54pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

d6rB says
Less chance to get guillotines aka French revolution with #1
For now they are protected against uprising by using News propaganda, offering cheap fast food, access to essentials through Walmart’s aggregation of products from people kept in virtually invisible squalor in far flung parts of the world.
5   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2019 Apr 29, 1:02pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Widespread ownership is both the best security, militarily, politically, and especially demographically.
6   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2019 Apr 29, 1:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

NuttBoxer says
The one where everyone gets their fucking hands out of my pocket, and let's me succeed for fail on my own.

That's option #2.
7   NuttBoxer   ignore (2)   2019 Apr 29, 1:10pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
That's option #2.


Wrong. That's I own 100% of what I earn, and everyone else owns 100% of what they earn.

I don't give a rats ass what you or anyone else has. Just leave my shit alone.
8   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   ignore (38)   2019 Apr 29, 1:13pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Whoever can own and exploit every last montetizable atom and pussy in the universe - should - and then find god and strangle him to death and shit in his mouth, exactly as the Founding Fathers commanded.

Otherwise, FREEDOM! would be meaningless.
9   Quigley   ignore (0)   2019 Apr 29, 1:15pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The politics of jealousy are ever ascendant among those who would enslave us all.
Life is not fair. Some get advantages and some get disadvantages. Only the outliers ever really change anything, so a progressive society must allow such outliers to do their thing if it wants to grow. Trying to stamp everyone into the same mold just results in equality of misery, as has been amply demonstrated during the 20th century.
10   d6rB   ignore (1)   2019 Apr 29, 1:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

NuttBoxer says
The one where everyone gets their fucking hands out of my pocket, and let's me succeed for fail on my own.

I think that if the truly rich would be allowed to fail, instead of constantly being bailed out by government, we would have situation closer to #1. BANKSTERS! and car company CEO's should have jumped out of skyscraper windows in 2008-09 instead of getting taxpayer bailouts and continuing their incompetent and corrupt ways.
11   Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Apr 29, 1:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Any serious attempt to enforce the alleged "option 1" would result in the top 0.001% owning 99+% of resources, including the lives of the rest of the population. e.g. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Kim, etc., because the enforcers would have to be given privileges to carry out the enforcement, and that privilege attracts the worst abusers.

In human history, there likely have never been a time when the top 20% only owning 33% of total societal resources. That's going back to a time before even agriculture: leaders of hunter-gatherer bands ate much more than 65% percent more than the rest per person (for one thing, the caloric output of the top hunters would require much more than1.65x the ones staying in the cave waiting to be fed); women are attracted to the top 20% of men, therefore the top 20% men got far more than half of the fundamental resource for human species: human eggs and uterus space, before there was any other resources. That's how evolution works, and why most species more advanced than fish (including most fish) engage in sexual reproduction.

It's not possible to design a societal system to optimize "equal result"; only optimizing "equal opportunity" / "equal treatment in front of law" are marginally possible.


BTW, the current alleged wealth disparity is largely the result of FED artificially holding down interest rate; a million-dollar house at 4% interest rate would be less than half that amount at 8% interest rate.
12   Ceffer   ignore (1)   2019 Apr 29, 1:42pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I own ALL of the wealth. Start kissing ass, peasants!
13   Hugolas_Madurez   ignore (4)   2019 Apr 29, 3:16pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Depends. #1 when the richest live in mudhuts and eat meat once a month and the poorest live in holes in the ground and don't eat meat at all is much worse than #2 when the richest live in palaces, sail in megayahts and fly in jets and the poorest live in modest houses, drive modest cars, get obese from gobbling up copious amounts of modest food, watch modest 55-inch TVs and use modest Android phones to send each other dick pics.
14   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2019 Apr 29, 3:28pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
Option #1:
- richest 20% owns 33% of the wealth.
- poorest 20% owns 10% of the wealth.

Option #2:
- richest 20% owns 84% of the wealth.
- poorest 20% owns 0.1% of the wealth.


According to a poll, 92% of Americans said option #1 is preferable.

That's before they were told that option #1 describes Sweden and option #2 describes the US.
15   Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Apr 29, 9:38pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

According to a poll, 92% of Americans said option #1 is preferable.


Proves how ill informed people are on "public matters" that are not part of their own daily lives' decision making.



That's before they were told that option #1 describes Sweden and option #2 describes the US.


Proves how gullible some allegedly "well educated" people are. Much of Swedish wealth is hidden in "non-profits" and "charities," instead of personal holdings, due to their tax structure, and/or non-public in corporate structure. For example, the largest Swedish company, IKEA, is not a publicly traded company, therefore there is no market valuation for the tightly held company, therefore its enterprise value is hidden from the books accounting for the alleged wealth distribution statistic . . . guess who own IKEA? Not the bottom 80%. The silly statistic goes to show just how gullible the allegedly "well-educated" and alleged "intellectuals" are.

The lack of market transparency of course hurts the average people. The tightly held corporations are not subject to shareholder oversight; the super-wealthy in Sweden are essentially living as feudal lords.
16   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2019 Apr 29, 9:39pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Hugolas_Madurez says
Android phones to send each other dick pics.


Shit, I gotta check my messages.

about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions