Let's Debate Inequality

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Meh. You're all statists. You still support government in some fashion, no?

I do support limited small government like the US constitution describes.

People on both sides advocate for government control one way or the other. Every thread is a scary thread, but then you get used to it.

I don't advocate for government control. I advocate for government to secure our right to exist and defend everyone's rights and liberties. I do not support large governments like the US has today that control our lives.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Because wealth is power. It is excessively used to bribe politicians and thus very undemocratic.

How much wealth is too much? What is the number?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yes, we should. But we also need taxation to re-appropriate the wealth to whom and to where it's needed. We NEED to stop individuals and corporate entities from accumulating huge piles of wealth that they will then use to corrupt the government to their own advantage. The wildly skewed accumulation of wealth and the corruption of government go hand in hand. Yes, we need to tax the rich far more than we are. But we also need to make sure the government spends that tax money back into the general economy, and NOT back into the pockets of the wealthy elites they took it from.

How much wealth is too much and how much should we tax the rich?

 

[blü 2]

How exactly is taxing the rich going to help or benefit anyone aside from the government who are the only ones who are getting the money?

UBI?

So what's your solution to the problem of inequality?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Do you think [inequality] is one of the most urgent problems facing the world today? If not, why not? If yes, what should be the solution.

Yes. I'm a humanist. The humanist philosophy is (among other things) about tolerance, promoting human development, and optimizing social and economic opportunity for the greatest number.

How exactly is taxing the rich going to help or benefit anyone aside from the government who are the only ones who are getting the money?

Do you like the roads you drive on? How about trash collection and police protection?

Why won't you transcend conservative indoctrination media? You can start by recognizing what taxation and government spending do for you and stop berating the process of taxing and turn you attention to how it's done.

The problem with taxing estates after we're dead is that it does nothing to thwart the corruption caused by allowing people to pile up great sums of money while alive.

That's not the purpose of such taxes. It prevents the intergenerational accumulation of wealth, a form of affirmative action for lucky heirs who don't deserve it.

The average American still thinks capitalism is just a dandy idea

I do. Well-regulated capitalism combined with some taxation and public spending seems optimal to me. It served me well and just about everybody else I know.

Competition would be lessened because we would all see how absurdly wasteful it is.

Disagree again. Competition among other things motivates efficiency. Learn to be less wasteful and you increase your profits.

As an artist I can assure that artists are not competing with each other.

Disagree yet again. You're a capitalist if you generate a service (including your labor even if it's an entry level position requiring no special training) or product and try to sell it in free markets. You are competing with other artists, some more successful than you, some less. You and they are competing for the same dollars.

You are likely doing relatively well compared to the average human being. Isn't your life relatively safe, easy, and comfortable? If so, why denounce the economic system that made that possible? You might have been born in Gaza or the Sudan, where they don't have the economic advantages that you enjoy

socialism does not stop anyone from getting rich. It stops them from getting rich at the expense of everyone else involved in the business enterprise.

You just contradicted yourself.

 

[Twilight Hue]

So what's your solution to the problem of inequality?

Less regulation and government interference that's driving up prices sky high would be a good start.

 

[Koldo]

But it's not.

Because of the law and the employers' decision. The employers can, for example, choose to offer an extra payment on the basis of how well the company performed, thus making every worker have a financial incentive on it performing well.

 

[Koldo]

If you can accumulate excessive wealth, why would you stop?

You wouldn't. Thus why someone else has to do it.

 

[blü 2]

Less regulation and government interference that's driving up prices sky high would be a good start.

And how would such a government finance public education, public health, age pensions, child protection, and so on?

 

[Heyo]

How much wealth is too much? What is the number?

There is no fixed number. It all depends on how costly it is to bribe government officials. Nobody should be able to buy a decision that only benefits the briber (and their friends) and hurts others. That should take into account the risk involved in bribing. In the US, make bribery illegal again, and that "too wealthy" number goes up again. But when you can buy a Supreme Court Justice for a few million dollars without repercussion for you or the Justice, you shouldn't have the few millions in the first place.

 

[Kfox]

I don't know what 401(k) is except from what I just read on Wikipedia. And they don't mention ownership in the company. Maybe there is another model you confused it with?

401-K is a retirement account set up with a lot of employers where the employee invests a percentage of their wages into an account, and the company will match (usually 50%-75%) of whatever you invested with company stock.

 

[Kfox]

Because of the law and the employers' decision. The employers can, for example, choose to offer an extra payment on the basis of how well the company performed, thus making every worker have a financial incentive on it performing well.

That's called "profit sharing"; this is done with many companies. Usually this is done in leu of wages. I worked for such a company once many years ago; they paid $8 per hour, but other companies in the area paid $10 per hour for the same work but they didn't offer profit sharing. The first 2 years the company made huge profits and I got a huge profit sharing check at the end of the year; then the next 2 years profits were lagging, and I got a very small profit sharing check. Eventually I found it better to work for the other company that paid $10 per hour because I couldn't afford to take a chance of less pay unless the company starts turning a profit

 

[Heyo]

401-K is a retirement account set up with a lot of employers where the employee invests a percentage of their wages into an account, and the company will match (usually 50%-75%) of whatever you invested with company stock.

So you get to partake in the decision-making like any other investor?

 

[Kfox]

So what's your solution to the problem of inequality?

Why is financial inequality a problem?

 

[Kfox]

So you get to partake in the decision-making like any other investor?

If you are a shareholder, you can vote just like any other shareholder.

 

[Kfox]

There is no fixed number. It all depends on how costly it is to bribe government officials. Nobody should be able to buy a decision that only benefits the briber (and their friends) and hurts others. That should take into account the risk involved in bribing. In the US, make bribery illegal again, and that "too wealthy" number goes up again. But when you can buy a Supreme Court Justice for a few million dollars without repercussion for you or the Justice, you shouldn't have the few millions in the first place.

Bribery IS illegal. Who is this Supreme Court Justice that was bribed?

 

[Arnaud1221]

I don't think it would be helpful for them to have more. But it's good to know that they need a accommodation. And also some basic thing like water and some food. So I prefer the rich and the inequality.

 

[Heyo]

Bribery IS illegal. Who is this Supreme Court Justice that was bribed?

You don't follow the news? Justice Thomas has got gifts amounting to more than one million from a guy named Harlan Crow. He may face investigations, but it is questionable if he will be removed from the court - or when.
This bribery may or may not be found to be illegal, but bribing politicians with campaign contributions is not illegal (and thus, technically not bribery), but it is a deeply questionable praxis in a democracy.

Democrats Seek Criminal Investigation of Justice Thomas Over Travel and Gifts

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

How much wealth is too much? What is the number?

How much money does anybody need? Whatever the number, more than that is greed.

It doesn't just harm others to be trying to accumulate the world's wealth. It hurts the greedy one, too.

Who is this Supreme Court Justice that was bribed?

I'm sure he means Clarence Thomas.

 

[We Never Know]

In the 1950's and more, the difference in income between CEOs and regular folk was pretty moderate and in the USA at least being middle-class was achievable. Now we find many with good incomes not able to afford the basics while the superrich compete on the sizes of the yachts and private planes.

As the Brookings folk noted, this is a problem not only in the US but world-wide Rising inequality: A major issue of our time

Check out this guys total annual salary for 2023...

Jon Winkelried, CEO TPG Inc

Salary	$509,615
Bonus	$0
Value of Stock Awards	$184,999,271
Value of Option Awards	$0
Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation	$0
Change in Pension Value and Deferred Compensation Earnings	$0
All Other Compensation	$13,177,040
Total	$198,685,926

$198,685,926 ÷ 365 =$544,345.00 per day.

Don't you feel sorry for the guy lol

Jon Winkelried | AFL-CIO

aflcio.org