by slimboyfat 91 Replies latest social current
Not to mention immoral.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16690607
The 100 wealthiest Americans have as much as the bottom 50%?
Many of the bottom 50% own guns in America don't they? I fear for the future if this situation continues. It is a colossal failure of political and ethical leadership that has allowed the situation to arrive at this point.
I luv America.
Well said Slimboyfat. Am I right in assuming that one of those 100 wealthiest Americans is currently a presidential candidate, known for being sheepish with his tax returns?!
Cedars
It's civilization taking its natural cycle.
Well said Slimboyfat. Am I right in assuming that one of those 100 wealthiest Americans is currently a presidential candidate, known for being sheepish with his tax returns?!
If you are talking about Romney, I doubt that he is one of the 100 wealthiest.
As to the thread topic, inequality has always been the status quo. The political attempts at equality are what has proven to be unsustainable.
This does not mean that the less or least wealthy necessarily have a miserable life.
We have indeed always had inequality, but not like this. A certain level of inequality is inevitable, but that doesn't mean that grotesque extremes should not be avoided. It's simply a matter of setting up the rules so that they are fair to everyone. Otherwise how far do you want to take it? Would you be alright with one person owning 90% of the wealth? As long as he got is 'fair and square' under capitalist conditions?
It's time to get real.
Historically inequality is a major predictor of societal collapse. The current situation is not merely unethical it is very dangerous.
I know! Lets take their money away and give it to everyone else!
james_woods - thanks for putting me in my place. I checked a recent Forbes list, and Romney doesn't even make the top 400.
slimboyfat - to narrow in on the real problem, surely what you are REALLY objecting to is poor "social mobility" in American society? I'm not a socialist, in that I don't think that everyone should automatically get to live like kings without having to work for it. The real problem facing society in general is surely that of making sure that everyone has the tools or opportunities to make something of themselves if they put forth reasonable efforts to do so? We both know that some do, and some don't. Those that do put forth effort, and get ridiculously rich as a result, surely shouldn't have to hand over a sizeable chunk of their earnings just to balance things out?
It's an interesting topic.
Cedars
I wouldn't have a problem with it, as long as they get appropriately taxed. What the hell do they need all the money for, honestly?
We make the rich richer by wanting to be like them.
Why are movie stars, sports hero's and music idols rich? We make them rich buying what they have to sell.
Why are capitalist business tycoons rich? you got it. by purchasing products and services from companies they own.
