The wealthiest 1% will own more wealth than the rest of the 99%, soon. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Medevila;46970254]but this has always been the case it's silly to act like that's a recent development[/QUOTE] Obviously, so why do people still operate on the delusion that we live in a state where the average citizen has any say in where their country is going?? And while wealth = power may not be a new development, this much concentration in wealth and economic disparity is new, since wealth inequality has been rising to new extremes since the 70s. So it needs to be addressed.

[QUOTE=Deng;46969197]We're all dead in the long run anyways.[/QUOTE] Yep. Some of us hopefully sooner than others. I'd rather have a more sustainable system of economic management and resource distribution that doesn't ruin fucking everything needlessly so soon however. Capitalism is an absolute failure when it comes to environmental preservation and the need to responsibly consume natural resources. Which is something that's required to, you know, ensure a standard of living for our entire species that allows it to continue to live and develop and build. But whatever. People are going to figure that out for themselves the hard way. Irreversible climate change is fun like that. "Money? Wipe your ass with it."

By the way, if you make more than $34,000 per year, this article is talking about you, beings this is the global 1%.

i blame the individuals of multicultural descent taking our jobs

[QUOTE=Deng;46969387]Yet at the same time, the gender pay gap is at a record low. It is no longer illegal to be homosexual. People live longer lives. People are becoming better educated, have access to more information, and politics is still a major thing (it's not like democracy suddenly keeled over and died and its fucked and can't be fixed). For quite a lot of people, it's definitely better off. I mean sure, all of these things might sound meaningless if half of the children in the country are in poverty. Truth is that it's simply too soon to say if the US really is going to shit. It's been a few years since the crash and the juggernaut that's America moves slowly (and with their system they really do like to take it easy). Sure a crash or war or republican administration can bash at and dent the intricate parts, but it's not like its going to stop its lumbering progress onwards.[/QUOTE] living in a region that was touted by obama's re-election comercials as being an "economic powerhouse" i can tell you even the economic powerhouses are shit places with tons of under employment, no real industry and people barely getting by, big industry didn't get hurt by the recession they had long since left the hardest hit regions. the highschools here don't do shit to help, half my class is working at walmart, dominos, and retail chains and i've been out of highschool for 4 years now

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46970367]By the way, if you make more than $34,000 per year, this article is talking about you, beings this is the global 1%.[/QUOTE] Pretty sad that even with the bar that low I'm still not part of the 1% club I can't lie I'm salty about it, even saltier due to the fact that I'm probably one of the top earners of the 99%, which just means I'm the first loser

[QUOTE=Comrade_Eko;46970723]Pretty sad that even with the bar that low I'm still not part of the 1% club I can't lie I'm salty about it, even saltier due to the fact that I'm probably one of the top earners of the 99%, which just means I'm the first loser[/QUOTE] I've been like right there for 4 years. I feel your pain man......

I think most people are forgetting the concept of income mobility. In any case, first things first, people ought to look at the study a little more closely. All of this information is based on independent studies that tell us essentially nothing, all of which was put together by a company with an international program designed to get rid of income gaps around the world. Suffice it to say, it's in their best interest to read the data in a way that most benefits their campaign (in order to get the most money to push their agenda). It's also worth considering that they aren't talking about any particular developed nation, as was said here before. Most people here are talking about how things are in the US. If we were talking about the US, I would advise you to look up the Department of Treasury income mobility study that was done from 1996 - 2005. It shows that, while the "income gap" as recorded by differences of income in tax brackets are misleading at best. The study by the Department of Treasury (for those who don't want to bother with google: [url]https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/incomemobilitystudy03-08revise.pdf[/url]) shows that the median income of the lowest level of taxpayers rose by 90%, while the median income of the top 1% DECLINED by 25.8%. The median income of the top quintile rose only by about 25%. The reason for this is simple. People who are in the lowest tax bracket don't stay there. They move up into higher tax brackets. As a result, to total income of the upper brackets grows larger because the number of people making that much money grows larger. The bottom bracket grows larger as well, but the difference in income is such that it appears to grow smaller (total income relative to higher brackets it proportionally lower because the income of each individual is lower). And even if that wasn't the case, I don't know how much I care. Rich people making more money doesn't mean I make less money. That's not how it works. And taxing the rich more isn't going to do anything but reduce federal income (supported by numerous studies, just look up the Laffer curve for a basic explanation of what I'm talking about, it's not really worth going into here), which would inevitably make things worse for the lower class, considering that they are nearly entirely dependent on the government for their basic necessities (food, water, electricity, housing, healthcare). I don't really understand where the logic comes from for most of this stuff. People just say "Tax them (the rich) more, that will solve problems" but they never say why, and they completely deny that anything else could actually be a better solution. People just tend to jump on a bandwagon and support whatever seems to be the most supported idea (which is usually just the first opinion posted here). It'd be worth doing a little research before supporting an idea that would actually make things worse...

What do the rich people even do with their money? Gather it more and more?

People who think the current system in the US is working are delusional. I'd love to pay more taxes as I make more money as long as I know that money is invested in public and medical facilities, such as schools or mental insitutions. People who yell "b-but muh moneyz" "America!" are a joke and part of the problem. They don't seem to realize that without everyone else below them, their wealth would have never existed.

[QUOTE=luverofJ!93;46970336]Obviously, so why do people still operate on the delusion that we live in a state where the average citizen has any say in where their country is going?? And while wealth = power may not be a new development, this much concentration in wealth and economic disparity is new, since wealth inequality has been rising to new extremes since the 70s. So it needs to be addressed.[/QUOTE] hey now, there was about as bad of income and wealth inequality near the end of the Roman Republic and they didn't have any problems at all

[QUOTE=T553412;46969361]Capitalism is good to create and move industries, not so much for the well being of people. Mix capitalist methods of production with socialist social programs and we get the definitive social model for humanity. Capitalism works. That's a fact. But it needs to be regulated and kept in check.[/QUOTE] Capitalism only workz if everyones employed and right now that's not the case and when robotics and automation are further developed and we get self driving vehicles. Nursebots etc Capitalisms days are up but thosw with money won't want to give up their power.

[QUOTE=Deaglez7;46968958]But they said it's gonna trickle down cmon[/QUOTE] it's trickling down in reverse

[QUOTE=Marcolade;46971359]it's trickling down in reverse[/QUOTE] Trickle up economics, the money making scheme of the 21st century

[QUOTE=Govna;46970355]I'd rather have a more sustainable system of economic management and resource distribution that doesn't ruin fucking everything needlessly so soon however. Capitalism is an absolute failure when it comes to environmental preservation and the need to responsibly consume natural resources. Which is something that's required to, you know, ensure a standard of living for our entire species that allows it to continue to live and develop and build.[/QUOTE] I don't blame capitalism for it. Plenty of other economic systems are incompetent enough to ruin the environment. Back in the bad old days of the Soviet Union and Maoist China, they went around causing massive environmental damage and consuming vast quantities of natural resources.

[QUOTE=Govna;46970355]Yep. Some of us hopefully sooner than others. I'd rather have a more sustainable system of economic management and resource distribution that doesn't ruin fucking everything needlessly so soon however. Capitalism is an absolute failure when it comes to environmental preservation and the need to responsibly consume natural resources. Which is something that's required to, you know, ensure a standard of living for our entire species that allows it to continue to live and develop and build. But whatever. People are going to figure that out for themselves the hard way. Irreversible climate change is fun like that. "Money? Wipe your ass with it."[/QUOTE] I think that is a very simplistic view of capitalism. People owning their own land for example generally means that people take better care of it - if you expect your kids to live off the same land, you're not gonna shit on it. Public perception can also very much change the policies of companies close to both the resource digging itself and the consumers (western oil companies for example - they both dig for and sell oil). Anyway, we should have stricter environmental rules - companies largely unaffected by public perception (mining companies for example, one of the dirtiest businesses around) won't care unless they themselves will be responsible for the clean up. I just don't think capitalism is necessarily incompatible with environmental responsibility.

[QUOTE=MasterFen006;46968932]we aren't already?[/QUOTE] Considering you could become that 1% you're not really a slave.

More money to the rich is good, they said. It will equal more jobs they said. I'm not really surprised. But again the worst part about this is that most of their money is just laying around there and not going back in to the economic.

The other annoying thing is the epic memeing around what trickle-down economics actually is (it's a strawman fallacy that doesn't refer to anything substantial). No economist has ever advocated for "trickle-down" economics. It doesn't even really exist and grossly misrepresents how economies actually function.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;46968943]Anybody want to bring up the argument that we shouldn't be taxing the rich any more I offer now as the time to bring that up[/QUOTE] Yeah, tax the rich more, so government gets even more money that it uses for war and another useless shit, when it already has enough money to help the poor but it wont. Taxes are as useful as shit if the people in power don't spend money the way it benefits the society.

Economy needs a reboot every now and then, but what happens in this process, I don't really want to know.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;46971761]yeah you can but its very very very very very very [i]very[/i] unlikely[/QUOTE] As has been mentioned the bar is set at ~34k. That's not even upper middle class by American standards.

[QUOTE=Deng;46968941]Well, I don't feel much like a slave.[/QUOTE] "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Goethe

[QUOTE=Carlton Dance;46971872]More money to the rich is good, they said. It will equal more jobs they said. I'm not really surprised. But again the worst part about this is that most of their money is just laying around there and not going back in to the economic.[/QUOTE] Rich people have relatively little cash compared to their total wealth, much of it is indeed invested in assets such as shares or real estate. So no, that money does go back into the economy.

[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;46972293]"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Goethe[/QUOTE] How do you know if you are free or not? Because well, given the way I live here, It seems a bit insulting and narrow minded to say people in the west are enslaved when there are people frequently forced to do work they can't refuse to do. They are tortured, go through physical pain, get raped and violently abused. If I'm not a debt slave forced to make bricks to repay debts, or in a gulag in North Korea, I'd say I'm most likely not a slave. Also your quote is completely out of context and I doubt you even know who Goethe is.

[QUOTE=Kite_shugo;46968946]How can we possibly overturn such an inequality? Thinking about it; I see no alternative where the majority of wealthy wouldn't try lobbying against the threat to their wealth[/QUOTE] Simple, fuck over the offshore accounts. [B]hard.[/B]

[QUOTE=Deng;46972746]How do you know if you are free or not?[/QUOTE] Eh that is the most terrifying aspect of all this.

[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;46972757]Eh that is the most terrifying aspect of all this.[/QUOTE] Well, I argue I am free. And anybody who disagrees should get some perspective outside of their cosy lifestyle in the west where the biggest problem is fucking gamergate or some bullshit, and see what real slavery is like.

For fox sake, capitalism is an economic system dealing with the distribution of scarce resources through buyers and sellers in markets etc. The level of wealth distribution through taxes and other methods can exist on any varying scale within a capitalist economic system, and is an issue dealt with by governments. Low levels of wealth distribution as is the case in the United States is reflective of government policies, NOT the capitalistic economic system. Also stop bitching about how 'bad' capitalism is due to it relying on infinite growth (FYI most economic growth is attributed to new technologies and doing things more efficiently rather than gathering more resources outright). Capitalism is not the central cause behind the massive wealth inequality currently occurring in the US. It is the level of wealth distribution through taxes that is the cause of this problem, which can be solved under capitalism through wealth distribution by increased taxes and funding social programs etc. Apparently many in the US are so against this idea though that it is surprising to me when they express outrage at the levels of wealth inequality, as it is pretty much the expected result from relatively low taxes on the wealthy. I also want to add that trickle-down economics is complete bullshit and not reflected in any mainstream economic theory, and any who peddle that crap either have something to gain from it or have no understanding of economic theory. Thank god I've never heard that term used in my country otherwise I would probably have an aneurysm.

soon we will return to the great depression again