New Data Shows Just How Unequal Wealth Has Become in the U.S. Since the 80s - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;28287464]You're begging the question. Per se.[/QUOTE] I have a feeling you don't even know what that means. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Niteshifter;28287530]I think US CEOs should do what this guy does: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqFxK3GMEkA[/media][/QUOTE] As weird as I find almost every facet of Japanese culture, I do admire a lot of their managerial practices.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28287173]You're preassuming that the device actually worked. [/QUOTE] Because it does. It's not a theory, it's been proven to work. We have devices today that produce wireless electricity. But they're nowhere near as efficient or as potent. Nikola Tesla was a bloody genius, if he would have gotten the financial backing I'm confident he would have come through with it.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28287458]:godwin: (assuming thats not a joke)[/QUOTE] Given that it's Sobotnik, it's probably a compliment.

[QUOTE=TH89;28287644]Given that it's Sobotnik, it's probably a compliment.[/QUOTE] I feel his pain. Everybody who disagrees with me is Hitler, too.

Yet still people hate on people that want higher paycheck and protect millionaires. America is fucked up.

[QUOTE=TH89;28287644]Given that it's Sobotnik, it's probably a compliment.[/QUOTE] Hitler was kinda an asshole.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28286173]Why are you all so clueless? Sure much of the money in the top 1-0.01 % came from the abuse of bureaucratic measures to manipulate capitalism but it is not the fault of capitalism. Why do you all assume that wealth must be equal? Do you think you are entitled to other peoples successes? The middle class is far more prosperous than it was in the 80's. We all have more food to consume, better standards of medicine, and entertainment. You all have clothes on your back, a roof over your head, and food in your stomach thanks to capitalism. Shut the fuck up.[/QUOTE] hey it's you again don't i remember you in an argument completely ignoring everything that everyone disagreeing with you said until you stormed out in a huff

[QUOTE=Matix;28281379]What sucks is that there is no capitalistic way to fix this, and nobody is willing to adapt.[/QUOTE] Would you rather be relatively poor in this system or absolutely destitute in a system where everyone's completely equal, except of course for whoever's in charge? There is no other permanent middle ground. It will slide one was or the other eventually.

[QUOTE=FunnyBunny;28287545] My personal favorite artist is Norman Rockwell, here's an example of his work: [img_thumb]http://www.normanadams.org/assets/images/NR4Want.JPG[/img_thumb] He made great paintings, and he didn't have to be paid ridiculous sums of money to do it.[/QUOTE] The reason that painting isn't worth much compared to other ones is because it implies absolutely nothing If your painting can be replicated detail by detail by just taking a photograph people generally see less artistic merit in it.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;28287753]hey it's you again don't i remember you in an argument completely ignoring everything that everyone disagreeing with you said until you stormed out in a huff[/QUOTE] Hey bro. I don't recall such an event.. please provide links. I do sometimes forgot about a topic and move onto others if that's what you're trying to get at.

[QUOTE=Jenkem;28287802]Would you rather be relatively poor in this system or absolutely destitute in a system where everyone's completely equal, except of course for whoever's in charge? There is no other permanent middle ground. It will slide one was or the other eventually.[/QUOTE] Technically in communism done correctly the people who are in charge are supposed to make the same amount of money as the citizens I think. However, communism has never been done correctly in human history and I doubt we could manage it if we tried currently.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28287282]You miss the fucking point. And yes I play multiple instruments, so there you go. The only way my music could be shared with the great masses of people is either through capitalism or if I was born hundreds of years ago in perhaps renaissance Italy and my uncle was the pope.[/QUOTE] A monkey can play an instrument. It's not the playing of the instrument that's creative, it's playing it [I]well.[/I] To play an instrument well you need to have emotional investment in the song being played and enough experience to know what to do to ellicit the needed response from those you're playing to. THAT is art. And let me tell you another thing, art is [I]not,[/I] let me repeat that, not motivated by money. Art is motivated by the artist's inspiration, and while you can pay a very talented artist to make something for you, it won't matter unless the artist feels some connection to the job. The moment art becomes about money it becomes bland and uninteresting, because just as the artist is devoid of emotional attachment to the piece, so is the audience that's looking at it. True, art needs to be advertised. But this nebulous construct you define as "capitalism" isn't what advertises it. Often capitalism makes it [I]harder[/I] to get your artwork seen, as more popular artists or the groups responsible for handling the work for said artist will quash work that is seen as a threat to their continued financial operation. This happens all the fucking time in movies, and I know this from first hand experience. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;28287836]The reason that painting isn't worth much compared to other ones is because it implies absolutely nothing If your painting can be replicated detail by detail by just taking a photograph people generally see less artistic merit in it.[/QUOTE] Art is completely subjective. It's value is determined solely by the person viewing it, and this can mean that something technically simple can be worth more than something that's complex. It's the same in that a painting that's incredibly depressing can be worth more than something that's incredibly uplifting.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;28287966]A monkey can play an instrument. It's not the playing of the instrument that's creative, it's playing it [I]well.[/I] To play an instrument well you need to have emotional investment in the song being played and enough experience to know what to do to ellicit the needed response from those you're playing to. THAT is art. And let me tell you another thing, art is [I]not,[/I] let me repeat that, not motivated by money. Art is motivated by the artist's inspiration, and while you can pay a very talented artist to make something for you, it won't matter unless the artist feels some connection to the job. The moment art becomes about money it becomes bland and uninteresting, because just as the artist is devoid of emotional attachment to the piece, so is the audience that's looking at it. True, art needs to be advertised. But this nebulous construct you define as "capitalism" isn't what advertises it. Often capitalism makes it [I]harder[/I] to get your artwork seen, as more popular artists or the groups responsible for handling the work for said artist will quash work that is seen as a threat to their continued financial operation. This happens all the fucking time in movies, and I know this from first hand experience.[/QUOTE] I never said that simply playing an instrument was creative, I have no idea where you're going with that. Art is not motivated by money you are right, it is perpetuated by it. I pointed out art as an example of individuality and the importance capitalism has on its production.

[QUOTE=Jenkem;28287802]Would you rather be relatively poor in this system or absolutely destitute in a system where everyone's completely equal, except of course for whoever's in charge? There is no other permanent middle ground. It will slide one was or the other eventually.[/QUOTE] Until the robots seize control of society or we all plug our minds into virtual reality playgrounds for the rest of eternity. But those are just my crazy dreams.

So what does advertise art if not capitalism? The only reason YOU and anyone else in this day and age can become a professional artist through your own effort and will is because of capitalism.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288013]I never said that simply playing an instrument was creative, I have no idea where you're going with that. Art is not motivated by money you are right, it is perpetuated by it. I pointed out art as an example of individuality and the importance capitalism has on its production.[/QUOTE] Art is not "perpetuated" by money. Artists will make art regardless of the financial prospects, that's what makes them fucking artists. Capitalism has no place in art's production, all capitalism does is allow certain artists to make money for their work under strict conditions. It no more facilitates art than a milk farm brings freedom to it's cows.

Someone please for the sake of the argument point out some great literary figures, musicians, and artists from Soviet Russia off the top of your head. Oh wait.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288036]So what does advertise art if not capitalism? The only reason YOU and anyone else in this day and age can become a professional artist through your own effort and will is because of capitalism.[/QUOTE] Internet, lol Modern communication methods mean that it is far easier to get your music out there without needing to go through the Capitalist system. Plenty of artists have never gotten more than a few random gigs and their music can be spread far and wide through the internet. There is no need for capitalism to spread art any more, if there ever was.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;28288054]Art is not "perpetuated" by money. Artists will make art regardless of the financial prospects, that's what makes them fucking artists. Capitalism has no place in art's production, all capitalism does is allow certain artists to make money for their work under strict conditions. It no more facilitates art than a milk farm brings freedom to it's cows.[/QUOTE] Capitalism allows art to be enjoyed by all, how are you missing this point? I highly doubt you don't have an mp3 device of some sort with music that you are able to enjoy only because of capitalism.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288055]Someone please for the sake of the argument point out some great literary figures, musicians, and artists from Soviet Russia off the top of your head. Oh wait.[/QUOTE] i dont know why you keep bringing up soviet russia because soviet russia is not an example of proper communism, or any type of government that people on this forum are actually advocating.

What are we even arguing about.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288082]Capitalism allows art to be enjoyed by all, how are you missing this point? I highly doubt you don't have an mp3 device of some sort with music that you are able to enjoy only because of capitalism.[/QUOTE] i always thought my iphone was powered by electricity, but apparently it runs on capitalism.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;28288072]Internet, lol Modern communication methods mean that it is far easier to get your music out there without needing to go through the Capitalist system. Plenty of artists have never gotten more than a few random gigs and their music can be spread far and wide through the internet. There is no need for capitalism to spread art any more, if there ever was.[/QUOTE] Modern communication methods are heavily aided by capitalism.. and even those "free" artists are still funded heavily in every direction by the efforts of capitalists. Did the government hand out the stereo system that you use to enjoy your music? I didn't think so. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Kybalt;28288084]i dont know why you keep bringing up soviet russia because soviet russia is not an example of proper communism, or any type of government that people on this forum are actually advocating.[/QUOTE] Soviet Russia is an example of the absence of capitalism, that's why I keep bringing it up.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288110]Modern communication methods are heavily aided by capitalism.. and even those "free" artists are still funded heavily in every direction by the efforts of capitalists. Did the government hand out the stereo system that you use to enjoy your music? I didn't think so.[/QUOTE] if capitalism had its way with the internet, net neutrality would be gone and the internet would look like cable tv.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288082]Capitalism allows art to be enjoyed by all, how are you missing this point? I highly doubt you don't have an mp3 device of some sort with music that you are able to enjoy only because of capitalism.[/QUOTE] Neither MP3 device nor the internet are products of Capitalism, they are just products of technology. CD stores and recording Labels are products of Capitalism. Technology can spread art just fine thank you very much.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288110]Modern communication methods are heavily aided by capitalism.. and even those "free" artists are still funded heavily in every direction by the efforts of capitalists. Did the government hand out the stereo system that you use to enjoy your music? I didn't think so. [editline]26th February 2011[/editline] Soviet Russia is an example of the absence of capitalism, that's why I keep bringing it up.[/QUOTE] please someone tell strider that no one is advocating the complete removal of capitalism.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288055]Someone please for the sake of the argument point out some great literary figures, musicians, and artists from Soviet Russia off the top of your head. Oh wait.[/QUOTE] There are many great literary and artistic soviet figures. They just aren't internationally famous. That's because being an artist isn't about promoting your work, it's about creating good works, and theres no shortage of amazing soviet works. [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_writers[/URL] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_artists[/URL] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_animators[/URL] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_painters[/URL] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_photographers[/URL] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_sculptors[/URL]

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288036]So what does advertise art if not capitalism? The only reason YOU and anyone else in this day and age can become a professional artist through your own effort and will is because of capitalism.[/QUOTE] I fail to see how "capitalism" can advertise something any more than "democratic socialism" could present the superbowl. If you're referring to money being used to propagate showrooms and exhibits, I don't see how that's inherently capitalist. If you're referring to money being used to commission work from artists I don't see how that's some sort of great boon unto the artist, seeing as how even in a communist utopia artists would still be commissioned and paid. If you're referring to artists being able to sell their work to people I don't see how that's some great accomplishment of capitalism.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28288110]Soviet Russia is an example of the absence of capitalism, that's why I keep bringing it up.[/QUOTE] Have you seen Soviet Films man? They're crazy but artistic as fuck. Plenty of them are Propaganda but it's not like the US doesn't have similar things. Plus the US has all the shitty "because it makes money" films, why make something artistic when another copy-paste romantic comedy will bring in the cash.

What strider is trying to say is that promise of a monetary reward is very often a driving force behind technological innovation.