Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by Saint, Feb 2, 2017.
How is not buying at 40k truck making you a little better off?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
How do you know how they vote or for whom?
Higher prevalence of 15k trucks, cheaper gas, better life.
Shitheads ballooned the market through the roof, now they are taking out seven year loans on vehicles to keep it airborne - when it crashes, even the used garbage they litter the landscape with will be bankrupting to own and run.
I just pointed out it wouldn't change.
Besides: You don't? Really?
I don't what?
And to the point: nobody says we have to give anybody anything - we just have to prevent disproportionate wealth and income accumulation at the top. How that is done is another question.
Reasonable people can disagree on the tactics. Historically, we know how the US managed it for two economic generations ending in 1981 - historically, we know how it was accomplished in other places and times (war, plague, and natural disaster the chief means). We have a democracy, we have a choice.
And Ice steps in to throttle discussion and ruin the thread, as he does so often.
Why the fuck don't you run alongside Alexandria, and cure the world's problems? You're damned sure of everything, because your primary programming language is PEBCAK.
and here we have the cauldron calling the kettle black. while i'll be the first to agree that ice is arrogant, insulting, dishonest, pathologically incapable of admitting anyone else point of view has validity if it disagrees with him and is entirely too enamored with his own cleverness and opinion; you are no better, in fact your far worse. Ice at least added something to the debate. You've spent most of your time in this thread bitching and moaning and not adding anything. You've done more to throttle discussion.
yes yes i know your going to swear and make personal attacks its all you got. try some introspection it do you good.
Interesting. Personal attacks is all he has? It's all you just posted.
Maybe I overreacted, but the dude just pisses me off. Too bad. No apology.
Senators supporting their own special interests - that's pretty much the definition of bloated bloviating assholes.
Because you live in a capitalist society. And if your landlord inherited your building you have to pay him big bucks - even if his only apparent ability is to smoke crack with your money.
Senators are supposed to promote the interests of their home states. I didn't say that they do their jobs anymore.
OK. Sounds like they are supposed to be a bloated bloviating corral full of assholes, then. Because looking out for special interests and the largest local contributors is a big part of what makes them assholes.
Unequal wealth distribution is destroying us as a society.
Some American billionaires like Bill Gates are making more money than all of Africa combined.
People these days are too much motivated in making money and getting rich quickly without taking any consideration of the harm and suffering it causes for too many poor people who will never become rich in their lifetime because of the shitty circumstances that they suffered.
In today's society money has become God and I get the feeling that everything revolves around one thing and one thing only: it's something called money.
While I agree in general, using Bill Gates as an example is a poor choice. The Gates Foundation is one of the most generous humanitarian aid organizations.
Gates Foundation to Invest $5 Billion in Africa Over Five Years
Let's give credit , where credit is due......Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Gates is an excellent example of wealth inequality, especially because he brings very little noise into the signal - he's not a psychopathic miser, criminal uncaught, shallow-brained abuser of others; his example focuses the discussion.
For example: How does charity to some undo the damage of wealth inequality inflicted on others?
I agree, and we can begin by admitting that his wealth was not inherited, but honestly "earned", by manufacturing a product that increased worldwide human industrial production a hundred fold.
By targeting that charity toward otherwise impossible solutions to great need, such as the cure for AIDS and Malaria in Africa. By supporting educational programs in under-served areas.
Example; What charities do Bill Gates support?
Bill Gates has supported the following charities listed on this site:
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Children's Vaccine Program.
Children with AIDS.
If the charities are large enough, entire countries may benefit and the question of preference tends to fade.
The grand impact of the Gates Foundation. Sixty billion dollars and one famous person can affect the spending and research focus of public agencies
There are advantages to very large single donors rather than many small donations. These large donations may be directed to special needs as identified by the donor, rather than be distributed in accordance to a diverse board of directors, each with their own agenda. (posited without prejudice)
Two examples - Camfed and Tostan. They are both dedicated to the education of women in third world countries. This education reduces wealth (and power) inequality in those countries.
That does not even undo the damage inflicted on the education of poor women in the US by the extreme wealth inequality exemplified by Bill Gates,
never mind the rest of the damage extreme inequality of wealth does in the US and wherever else it has been allowed.
Recall the question:
Of course not. Don't be silly. It's not a US charity. Recall the question:
" How does charity to some undo the damage of wealth inequality inflicted on others?"
Nothing about US in there.
Everything in my posts has included the US, so far. To claim I have excluded the US from consideration is bizarre. I have no idea where you got the idea that the US was excluded from my posting here.
Bill Gates is a citizen of the US. He appeared in this thread as an example of wealth inequality, and for no other reason.
A large and significant amount of the damage done by wealth inequality as exemplified by Gates is done in the US to US citizens. He's a good example, for the reasons above and others.
The US, compared with any nation in Africa, is a nation of "others". Its residents are "others", compared with residents of any place in Africa. There is no significant overlap.
You posted something about charity in a couple of places in Africa - admirable, but the discussion here and in my posting was not limited to the damage done by wealth inequality in those particular places in Africa.
The damage done by wealth inequality in the US is also part of the discussion - explicitly, above, and also by direct implication upon choosing Gates and his contribution to wealth inequality as an example - the US is were we expect to find the economy and lives most directly damaged by the wealth inequality among US citizens, such as Gates.
Back on track? All cleared up?
Separate names with a comma.