[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;40100910]What I stated gave me wealth are things that are available to every person in the UK - in my view that makes the UK relatively equal. I'm sure it's different in the US and that's fine, but I would prefer reasonable explanation about it.
[B]No they're not, you can't even get this part right. Do you live in some version of the world where people don't live below the poverty line? That there aren't people who struggle to pay for the basic amenities? Jesus christ how out of touch are you? US, UK, Canada, whatever, it's all the same and you're STILL missing that. [/B]
You accusing me of 'stating my opinion as fact' is pretty rich, there are a handful of things that could be viewed as me stating 'facts' but consider that no-one here has given solid facts either. Nor am I ignoring what people say, look at my posts - most of my posts are questions, the rest are all suppositions.
[B]What else have you done? You've asked questions that only the answer you want will do for you[/B]
Could you define how things are not 'unilaterally better' if living standards go up? Given that the UK has greater wealth equality than the US, and I understand that things like education and healthcare are 'free' in the UK - would you agree, as someone posted earlier, that wealth equality would come about by ensuring the minimum that someone should have?
[B]Because even if the standard of living goes up, do you not see the problem? With an increased standard of living, comes with an increased upkeep of living to keep that standard. Standard of living also doesn't deal with the people who are poorest and missing the most. There are people below the average. [/B]
Also I wouldn't suggest ignoring it, nor am I claiming it isn't a bad thing - I've just challenged people on why they state that as fact in order to get some sort of explanation
[B]Wealth inequality breeds a lot of social unrest. It breeds economic unrest and creates economic turmoil as a working class isn't able to support the richest of the country due to their economic disadvantage and lack of market buying power.[/B][/QUOTE]
I'm curious, what would you define as the point where there is no wealth inequality?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;40100910][editline]30th March 2013[/editline]
it must hurt to just be so fucking wrong about something[/QUOTE]
Which citizens of the UK are not allowed NHS treatment or at least basic education?
[QUOTE=butt2089;40100986]I'm curious, what would you define as the point where there is no wealth inequality?[/QUOTE]
it isn't about having no wealth inequality
who even said such a stupid thing
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;40100997]it isn't about having no wealth inequality
who even said such a stupid thing[/QUOTE]
It might not be, but I'm asking you what you personally think would be the point that everyone was equally 'wealthy'
[QUOTE=butt2089;40101042]It might not be, but I'm asking you what you personally think would be the point that everyone was equally 'wealthy'[/QUOTE]
it isn't about having no wealth inequality
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;40101049]it isn't about having no wealth inequality[/QUOTE]
I know it's not, I appreciate that there's no intention to - I'm asking for your opinion on where you would define wealth equality, or at least what you think would be a preferable situation.
[QUOTE=ravenhurst;40095436]Imagine what innovative geniuses we'd miss out on when the entirety of someone's effort is taken away from them. The act of acquiring a billion dollars produces sooooooo much good for society. Also income inequality is not a problem because the money doesn't just sit there. It gets invested in capital whether rich people want to or not because they generally put their money in banks. Do you know what banks do? Well they store money for safekeeping and they also allow two people to share the same dollar by giving out loans. l2economics people dont have to pay taxes to do good for society you dolt. our quality of life has nothing to do taxes and everything to do with people trading their goods and skills.[/QUOTE]
RAWWWWK! Invisible hand! Trickle down! Bootstraps! Invisible hand! RAWWWWWK!
[QUOTE=butt2089;40101136]I know it's not, I appreciate that there's no intention to - I'm asking for your opinion on where you would define wealth equality, or at least what you think would be a preferable situation.[/QUOTE]
We've already been over that.
You simply ignored it, either because it doesn't fit your world view, or weren't simple enough for you.
You're acting like a stereotypical kid born into a well-off family, who somehow can't comprehend that some people are in a shitty situation that [I]ISN'T[/I] their own fault.
And even better, you're also failing to understand how something as simple as growing wealth disparity is making it even worse.
My common sense wants to rip out your spine and bludgeon you with it, hot damn, and that usually only happens when the planets are aligned with a full moon.
well thank fuck this is satire, I spend money on food; I haven't gone clothes shopping in two years
[QUOTE=Sprockethead;40088688]To anyone who do not understand why this has to be absurdist humor, take a quick glance:
[IMG]http://americablog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/income-distribution-in-america-chart.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure that's from that video that one guy made mixing up net worth with how much money people actually have.
I also remember arguing with a guy in the thread were that was posted and he quite literally said that having wealth is a disease.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;40100827]All of which are because of the situation you were born into and not "hard work"
gg[/QUOTE]
The difference between our statements is yours is based off of empty rhetoric instead of observed economic phenomena. Zeke is actually kind of a mad shitposter but fp is biased in his favor.
About half of the people who post in Sensationalist Headlines are mad shitposters, your point is?
it must take a very cynical outlook of the world in order to think that being vocal about your political views constitutes as mad shitposting
[QUOTE=ravenhurst;40101995]The difference between our statements is yours is based off of empty rhetoric instead of observed economic phenomena. Zeke is actually kind of a mad shitposter but fp is biased in his favor.[/QUOTE]
recent
postal banned ravenhurst for 7 Days in The poor spend all the money. Isn’t it obvious? with the reason “shitposting and trolling again.”
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;40087107]The fuck are you doing insulting my Canary Yellow cardigan? This thing is ungodly warm and comfortable.
I about died from an aneurysm, that's one of the most unbelievably fucked up and disconnected statements from reality I have ever read in my life.
This isn't news, it's a really shitty opinion.
This guy is a bastard.
Twitter: @mrmarksteel[/QUOTE]
The thing is such obvious satire it almost has claws, and barbs to make everyone aware of it to be honest.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
