ADVERTISEMENT

Poll shows Trump leads GOP field in NC

I never predicted Sanders would be president. I merely said that if campaign finance reform was your concern, he should be your guy. The same could be said if income inequality is something you consider to be a serious issue.

It's kinda funny to call supporting Bernie Sanders sad, in the middle of a thread about people supporting Donald Trump.
 
I doubt you mean this. It really doesn't concern you that middle class income and wealth have stagnated while income and wealth of the top 1% are skyrocketing?

The important part of this is that middle class income and wealth are stagnant. Wealth redistribution is not the answer though.
 
The important part of this is that middle class income and wealth are stagnant. Wealth redistribution is not the answer though.


Our culture has killed any kind of motivation for the have nots. They're sitting around waiting on wealth redistribution. So IMO, the gap will continue to widen. But it's not the fault of those aiming high. It's the fault of those not aiming for anything at all.
 
The important part of this is that middle class income and wealth are stagnant. Wealth redistribution is not the answer though.
I think the two are related. And wealth redistribution is just one of many possible solutions to the problem. I'm just curious about people who won't acknowledge there is a problem in the first place. Few would dispute that monopolies over business are undesirable and justify regulation. Why not monopolies over wealth? If the structure of a capitalist system is creating these inequalities that are harming the vast majority of the population, why not seek ways to address it?
 
I think the two are related. And wealth redistribution is just one of many possible solutions to the problem. I'm just curious about people who won't acknowledge there is a problem in the first place. Few would dispute that monopolies over business are undesirable and justify regulation. Why not monopolies over wealth? If the structure of a capitalist system is creating these inequalities that are harming the vast majority of the population, why not seek ways to address it?


How is it "harming" the vast majority? I have not been harmed.
 
How is it "harming" the vast majority? I have not been harmed.
It harms people the same way that business monopolies do--by allowing the few to benefit disproportionately to the many. If there was a monopoly on food supplies in your area and everyone was forced to pay their inflated prices, you might say you're not being harmed if you can afford to pay it. But you are. You're being forced to work harder for a smaller return. The same thing happens when wages stagnate but costs don't. People are forced to work longer and longer hours to afford the same standard of living. This is what happens when profits are increasingly diverted to a smaller and smaller group of people. Our generation, as a whole, works harder for a lower standard of living than our parents did. If things don't change, it will be even worse for our children.
 
I think the two are related. And wealth redistribution is just one of many possible solutions to the problem. I'm just curious about people who won't acknowledge there is a problem in the first place. Few would dispute that monopolies over business are undesirable and justify regulation. Why not monopolies over wealth? If the structure of a capitalist system is creating these inequalities that are harming the vast majority of the population, why not seek ways to address it?

Because there are ways to address it already.

This is a transition time for our economy- we were up until very recently a manufacturing based economy. Now, we are a service based economy, but yet a significant portion of the labor force is still trained for manufacturing. This is changing but does not happen overnight.

The second issue is that govt regulation has become so absurd that a wealthy person does not want to invest in creation- far too much of a hassle. And when the alternative is a Fed enabled bull market, the capital that would have gone to new companies and products is now going to the stock market. Hopefully this will change, but probably won't as long as the executive branch is controlled by the party that favors more regulation.

Don't get me wrong- I like it when the legislative branch is controlled by one party and the White House by the other. I would just prefer that it be flipped, for business's sake.
 
It harms people the same way that business monopolies do--by allowing the few to benefit disproportionately to the many. If there was a monopoly on food supplies in your area and everyone was forced to pay their inflated prices, you might say you're not being harmed if you can afford to pay it. But you are. You're being forced to work harder for a smaller return. The same thing happens when wages stagnate but costs don't. People are forced to work longer and longer hours to afford the same standard of living. This is what happens when profits are increasingly diverted to a smaller and smaller group of people. Our generation, as a whole, works harder for a lower standard of living than our parents did. If things don't change, it will be even worse for our children.

Or people could take matters into their own hands. Grow your own food. Make your own supplies. You know, there was a time when humans existed without money, stores, and the like. Wait a minute...I'm going all strum on you here. Let me back up...

I underlined the part that was interesting to me. Are people owed a certain standard of living? I don't think so. The Constitution was written to guarantee people's ability to live free and to make your own life. People weren't guaranteed any specific standard of living - especially a standard that one might have seen in better times.
 
Obviously you haven't been following his campaign. Almost the only people pouring money into his campaign are doing so less than 100 bucks at a time.


IF he wins Dem nomination you can bet your sweet dollar big time donors will poor in money like a flash flood.Especially the Hollywood elite.
 
Are people owed a certain standard of living? I don't think so. The Constitution was written to guarantee people's ability to live free and to make your own life. People weren't guaranteed any specific standard of living - especially a standard that one might have seen in better times.
So are you opposed to antitrust laws that prohibit monopolistic behavior? Should a large business be able to buy up all its smaller competitors and then jack up prices when there is no competition left? The company should be free to buy and sell whatever it wants, right? And consumers aren't entitled to fair prices. Does capitalism work better or worse with these laws in place?
 
For now. There's no way he won't get serious money from all sorts of donors if he picks up a head of steam.

And the same should be said of Trump- no way will he spend his own money if he can use someone else's.



That would be a losing purpose if he uses somebody elses money,that means he'll have to ponder to their wishes.Donald doesn't like being told what to do,he'll use his own money.
 
Because there are ways to address it already.

This is a transition time for our economy- we were up until very recently a manufacturing based economy. Now, we are a service based economy, but yet a significant portion of the labor force is still trained for manufacturing. This is changing but does not happen overnight.

The second issue is that govt regulation has become so absurd that a wealthy person does not want to invest in creation- far too much of a hassle. And when the alternative is a Fed enabled bull market, the capital that would have gone to new companies and products is now going to the stock market. Hopefully this will change, but probably won't as long as the executive branch is controlled by the party that favors more regulation.
There may be some truth to these, but how long do we wait before we take action to address the issue? Inequality has been increasing for 35 years now and shows no sign of stopping. I don't pretend to have the solution, but I think it has to be acknowledged as a problem that needs attention.
 
There may be some truth to these, but how long do we wait before we take action to address the issue? Inequality has been increasing for 35 years now and shows no sign of stopping. I don't pretend to have the solution, but I think it has to be acknowledged as a problem that needs attention.

Inequality has existed since the dawn of time and has been increasing since then.

The best chance of people moving up in class is allowing the free market to function. Any attempts to manipulate markets inevitably go askew. Of course, in today's thinking, that just means that we should further force markets to behave as desired, which gets things even more screwed up.

Government's role here, IMO, is to provide opportunities for education. Anything past that counterproductive.
 
11248806_850764668341365_7256841980992494109_n.jpg
 
Inequality has existed since the dawn of time and has been increasing since then.

The best chance of people moving up in class is allowing the free market to function. Any attempts to manipulate markets inevitably go askew. Of course, in today's thinking, that just means that we should further force markets to behave as desired, which gets things even more screwed up.

Government's role here, IMO, is to provide opportunities for education. Anything past that counterproductive.
Then I'll ask you the same question I asked GSD: Do you think things like monopolistic behavior and insider trading should be prohibited? Those are both significant restrictions on the free market, but if they are allowed, then history has repeatedly shown that ordinary people get royally screwed. Most people recognize that restrictions on free market behavior are appropriate when the free market, left to its own devices, is achieving undesirable results. The question is the right balance of freedom and regulation.

I don't think government regulation is the root cause of the recent spike in wealth consolidation. Other forces like globalization are playing a much larger part because this is happening worldwide. As long as hugely disproportionate amounts of income are flowing to a tiny fraction of the population, regular people will continue to fall further and further behind.
 
This should be the Republican Party motto. Economic system benefiting only millionaires? Easy, just be a millionaire! Never mind that you can't save any money because your wages are not rising to match inflation.


I was channeling my inner Colin Cowherd with that comment. That's totally something he'd say. And on the day I hear of his leaving ESPN, I'm just paying homage.

But seriously though, the bigger message is why aren't we pushing people to strive for greatness? Our society simply looks for ways to coddle the supposed disadvantaged instead of telling them, "you can be at the top too." It may be harder for some than others, but that's life. Not everyone is equal but we all have equal opportunity. Be creative. Invent something. Improve something. Provide something.

*disclaimer - I am neither a registered republican nor a millionaire. Far from both.
 
I heroically avoided being born in Viet Nam at the time of the conflict, btw.

: smiles:




I was of the age that we were in that lottery number system as to who was drafted. I had friends that went off to war and came back in a flag draped coffin. Every night on the news there was nothing but death.

Heluva thing for an 18 year old 'kid' . .
 
Trump gives out personal cell phone # of rival POTUS contender Lindsey Graham, on live TV to millions of viewers.

Ya gotta question this man's mental stability . . and the republicans wanna call President Obama. . 'Obozo' . . . LOL

Donald Trump, the republican gift that continues to give, give, and then give some more . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: yrusonvus
Trump gives out personal cell phone # of rival POTUS contender Lindsey Graham, on live TV to millions of viewers.

Ya gotta question this man's mental stability . . and the republicans wanna call President Obama. . 'Obozo' . . . LOL

Donald Trump, the republican gift that continues to give, give, and then give some more . .

Trump is actually doing the relevant GOP contenders a favor as they will look much more moderate when the general elections roll around.

There is no chance that Trump is nominated- it would actually be shocking to even see him in a primary.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT