US wealth gap among world's highest

[GoldenBoy812]

the poor majority might start supporting revolutionary populists who will turn america into a dictatorship...

Probably not:rastasmoke:

[maladroit]

you mean, probably not AGAIN

Communist Party USA - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[JakeMartinez]

wealth gaps will always exist, and nobody is suggesting that they should not exist

the problem is that the wealth gap is too large and still growing...if you think that doesn't cause social unrest, take a look at what the top 1% spends on protecting their 50% share of the entire country's wealth...the poor majority might start supporting revolutionary populists who will turn america into a dictatorship...people like hitler rode into power on a wave of poverty-induced rage

I don't think a wealth gap should exist if wealth determines your ability to live.

It's easy of us with money to say "Oh, those poor people without health insurance and don't have a home should just get a fucking job and stop bitching", but it's not as easy as it sounds, even in such a great nation as ours. If you were an employer, would you hire a homeless man knowing he doesn't have anywhere he could bathe himself and clean up? How are customers going to react to that? Even if he was applying for a job where he's hidden from view, most employers would much rather higher someone nice and clean who isn't so desperate for work.

I just fail to see how we can say capitalism is the best, but then turn around and say we need social programs to protect the interests of the common good, and then turn around AGAIN and say that we can't do too much or else people will get lazy and stop working.

How about giving people what they need and fucking educating them on the importance of contributing to society, instead of pointing a fucking gun to their heads???

[GoldenBoy812]

I don't think a wealth gap should exist if wealth determines your ability to live.

The soviets tried to intervene on this behalf. It failed...

It's easy of us with money to say "Oh, those poor people without health insurance and don't have a home should just get a fucking job and stop bitching", but it's not as easy as it sounds, even in such a great nation as ours. If you were an employer, would you hire a homeless man knowing he doesn't have anywhere he could bathe himself and clean up? How are customers going to react to that? Even if he was applying for a job where he's hidden from view, most employers would much rather higher someone nice and clean who isn't so desperate for work.

The homeless are not necessarily considered unemployed.

I just fail to see how we can say capitalism is the best, but then turn around and say we need social programs to protect the interests of the common good, and then turn around AGAIN and say that we can't do too much or else people will get lazy and stop working.

Its called hypocrisy...

How about giving people what they need and fucking educating them on the importance of contributing to society, instead of pointing a fucking gun to their heads???

Whoa now, why where are guns being pointed at peoples heads? Are you saying that people will succeed if you provide all of their needs? I believe that to be naive, as failure will always exist in regards to humanity. In reality, only the strong survive, only the strong succeed...

[McDanger]

That's the thing dude, too many people differ on exactly what human rights are. I might be biased when I say this, but I feel that Republicans (the fake ones around now, anyway) do not feel that health-care is a right, and that people are on their own, even when it's the government who's screwing them. Same when it comes to money; if you're poor, you better figure a way out of it, because we wont help you. If you're rich, you probably deserve it, and shouldn't feel obligated (morally or otherwise) to give any of it to people who either NEED it or REALLY deserve it. Of course, I'm of a mind that if you're rich you should be giving a minimum of half your income away, but I guess that's socialist. Eh, I can live with that.

The problem with your statement is you say the rich should be giving 1/2 of thier income away, but you support the gov't "taking" and not voluntary giving. That sounds exactly like Biden. Supports increased taxes, but his charity amounts to less than 1% of his income. He is only charitable with somebody else's money.


The UN says at the end of the study that the countries with the least disparity are: China, Indonesia, and Etiopia. Now those are places we should aspire to.
That is the problem, when you try to make everybody the same it brings everybody down instead of raising the people at the bottom.
I would imagine that our bottom is still better than these 3 countries middle, since we have the richest poor people in the world.

[McDanger]

I think Obama has it pretty right, 250K a year is pretty damn rich. I'd probably make those folks give 1/3 away. From 500K and up should be half, minimum. People simply do not need that much money.

I suppose its a good thing freedom is not based on need.

[maladroit]

if income tax is anti-freedom, then all rich americans are not free anyway, and only the poor americans know true freedom because they don't pay tax...in reality, rich people enjoy the most freedom, and poor people enjoy the least

it's a sad thing that freedom from want is not based on need (as in wanting health care and affordable housing and a basic standard of living)

[McDanger]

if income tax is anti-freedom, then all rich americans are not free anyway, and only the poor americans know true freedom because they don't pay tax...in reality, rich people enjoy the most freedom, and poor people enjoy the least

it's a sad thing that freedom from want is not based on need (as in wanting health care and affordable housing and a basic standard of living)

The rich do not have any more freedoms than the poor. Just because they do not take advantage of them is not the fault of the rich(whatever rich is).

I did not say income tax is anti-freedom, but income based on what some bureaucrat decides you need is anti-freedom.

I worked a full time job plus another 8hrs/day on my business for 20 years, plus did not have children. These actions and choices are what allowed me to build my business. And now that it worked for me some lazy gov't fuck wants to take it from me to give to some single mom with 5 kids.

[Psycho4Bud]

I worked a full time job plus another 8hrs/day on my business for 20 years, plus did not have children. These actions and choices are what allowed me to build my business. And now that it worked for me some lazy gov't fuck wants to take it from me to give to some single mom with 5 kids.

EXACTLY! And now that your at that point YOU deserve to reap the rewards of your long hours and hard work. Likewise, if YOU feel like donating to a certain organization it should be left up to YOU as to where YOUR money will go, not the government!

By the way, MUCH respect to ya!!:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4:

[maladroit]

what lazy fuck is now proposing to take your money and give it to a single mom with five kids?

george bush is doing that now, as well as the presidents that preceeded him...mccain proposes to take your money and give it to the banks who are foreclosing on people that can't afford their mortgages so they can stay in their homes...that is the way the system has been for a long time and it's not going to change no matter who wins the election