Freeing Up the Rich to Exploit the Poor--What Trump and Brexit are about

Armoured

So is America great again yet?
Supporter
Aug 31, 2013
34,358
14,061
✟234,967.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Yes, many companies offer many more benefits than required by law in order to attract and keep good employees. The more good jobs are available, the better the benefits will be for workers.
Uh-huh. All human experience and history to the contrary notwithstanding.
 
Upvote 0

Thursday

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2016
6,034
1,562
59
Texas
✟49,429.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
This is in no way challenges the claim of the many, highly qualified experts who believe there is a problem with concentration of the wealth at the top.

The fact of progressive taxation only shows that the "system" has some mechanisms to redress the plight of the poor. But to argue that progressive taxation undermines the argument that there is a problem of wealth being concentrated in the top 1% is like saying that the fact that we had a cold winter here in, say, Switzerland, undermines the argument that the earth is getting warmer. The big picture data is clear - wealth is flowing to the top:

From Wikipedia:

In Inequality for All—a 2013 documentary with Robert Reich in which he argued that income inequality is the defining issue for the United States—Reich states that 95% of economic gains went to the top 1% net worth (HNWI) since 2009 when the recovery allegedly started.[8] More recently, in 2017, an Oxfam study found that eight rich people, six of them Americans, own as much combined wealth as "half the human race".

This is the problem with some who adopt your position - hand-waving arguments with no substantive evidential support.


Robert Reich is not a credible source. He is a radical leftist.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
This is in no way challenges the claim of the many, highly qualified experts who believe there is a problem with concentration of the wealth at the top.
Well, "concentration of wealth" is pretty vague. I was asking for something other than sloganeering. What is enough? Where should the line be drawn? What are the consequences of doing this or that? Is there a policy that would be reasonable but too much of it would not be? That sort of thing. Usually, people in discussions like this one just say "Soak the rich. They don't need what they have."

This is the problem with some who adopt your position - hand-waving arguments with no substantive evidential support
I didn't adopt a position in my earlier post. It's you who have "hand-waving arguments with no substantive evidential support" because you've yet to answer what I asked and actually outline a real life proposal.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Every statistic shows the wealthiest are getting wealthier while everyone else has stagnant or falling wages.

Obviously the money is out there bit ut's not trickling down. Intervention is necessary.
How many of "the wealthiest" people are there for every poor person??
 
Upvote 0

ExodusMe

Rough around the edges
Jan 30, 2017
533
162
Washington State
✟34,734.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
@Fantine How can you blame capitalism right now? Obama, who was historically one of the most socialist presidents to have ever been in office, was in office for 8 years and is the source of a majority of what you are complaining about.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Go look up the charts yourself. The stats all say the same thing. Without serious effirt, they're,impossible to ignore.
I'll do the explaining then. There are tens of thousands of poor people for every wealthy person, so the notion that all we need to do is have them meet somewhere in the middle by appropriating the wealth of the wealthy person for the benefit of the poor one, is an illusion.

If all the money owned--not just the annual income--of the rich were distributed to the poor, the rich would be brought down, but the poor would remain poor, albeit with a few additional dollars. And when that was spent, of course there would be no additional monies coming from the formerly wealthy people.

:wave:
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I am well aware of the fact the rich make profits off of cheap labor by funding communist China with out "trickle down economics" to save a few pennies on the dollar in America.

China invested very heavily on infrastructure to reduce the cost
of goods manufacture and as a result can produce an iphone for $200 but
an all american iphone would cost $600, or $2000 retail.

100% made in America products are 2 to 4 times the cost. A large number
of companies work hard to locate in the US, but the competition often will
not cooperate and do the same.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

381465

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2017
1,463
950
None
✟30,626.00
Country
Zimbabwe
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Uh-huh. All human experience and history to the contrary notwithstanding.

Hmmm. Not sure how to respond.

Most people I know who have left jobs voluntarily, left them for better pay, benefits, working conditions, etc.

More job openings means employer competition for talented workers. That increased competition for the best candidate triggers better bait for the biggest fish.

I thought I was human and this has definitely been my experience, so...
 
Upvote 0

Armoured

So is America great again yet?
Supporter
Aug 31, 2013
34,358
14,061
✟234,967.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Hmmm. Not sure how to respond.

Most people I know who have left jobs voluntarily, left them for better pay, benefits, working conditions, etc.

More job openings means employer competition for talented workers. That increased competition for the best candidate triggers better bait for the biggest fish.

I thought I was human and this has definitely been my experience, so...
Ad you think your personal experience extrapolates to everyone, do you? Well, here's some light reading for your consideration; Working and Living Conditions - The Industrial Revolution
 
Upvote 0

Armoured

So is America great again yet?
Supporter
Aug 31, 2013
34,358
14,061
✟234,967.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
@Fantine How can you blame capitalism right now? Obama, who was historically one of the most socialist presidents to have ever been in office, was in office for 8 years and is the source of a majority of what you are complaining about.
Any basis for these assertions?
 
Upvote 0

381465

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2017
1,463
950
None
✟30,626.00
Country
Zimbabwe
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Greyy

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
514
214
XX
✟9,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Since the poor pay no income taxes and actually get money given to them when they file a 1040...and "the rich" pay the great majority of all income taxes, even if they remain wealthy afterwards...

...exactly where does the imagery of the rich getting richer at the expense of the poor end? Would those who throw around such talk so casually be satisfied if "the rich" had every bit of their income confiscated and given to the poor, whether that be the working poor or those who don't care to work?? Where would tomorrow's lunch money for the poor come from in that case?

You might re-read the prophets, one of the greatest offenses to God was the treatment of the poor.

Income inequality is a necessity of life, but it does not justify unregulated capitalism. With money comes power and influence, and with those, the means to acquire more power and influence.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Greyy

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
514
214
XX
✟9,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
@Greyy You don't know what you are talking about. The rich are going to make money where ever they can. That is a pre-requisite to being 'rich'.

You don't even know what you are posting about.

I argued that trickle down economics is a farse, because proving more wealth does not mean they are going to use it to create jobs and industry domestically. They are free to use it to build up China, for example.

Unfortunately, it is Obama's fault that he let the rich exploit labor from other countries.

Yes, Obama constantly passed legislation promoting foreign investment. Before Obama, Americans didn't have any money invested in China, at all. It's all his fault.

Imagine if you remove all trade regulations for imports from a communist country. You are essentially subsidizing the Chinese government, because we all know how well China takes care of their citizens. That's Obama era policies which was welfare for the world paid for by American's masked as "globalization".

Trumps goal to increase taxes on imports will reverse the exploitation of the poor because we will no longer be competing with cheap labor from China.

How old are you, because you seem to think America was in isolation before Obama and he created fair trade. I am not his defender, but you are posting nonsense.
 
Upvote 0

Greyy

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
514
214
XX
✟9,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Well, "concentration of wealth" is pretty vague. I was asking for something other than sloganeering. What is enough? Where should the line be drawn? What are the consequences of doing this or that? Is there a policy that would be reasonable but too much of it would not be? That sort of thing. Usually, people in discussions like this one just say "Soak the rich. They don't need what they have."

The concept of modern free market capitalism comes from the unchristian, disgusting view of Thomas Hobbes who believed human beings were nothing more than animals that found a way of living together in peace by agreeing to arbitrary, rather than instrinsic, rights. Humans are thus free to do whatever they want so long as they can get away with it. There is no thought to what serves the greater good.

The Earth belongs to God and thus it belongs to society. As a society, we have the obligation of determining how those resources are distributed. The aquistion of wealth as a means to an end has been destructive to society. Our choice is not between absolute socialism, or absolute capitalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FenderTL5
Upvote 0

Greyy

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
514
214
XX
✟9,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I'll do the explaining then. There are tens of thousands of poor people for every wealthy person, so the notion that all we need to do is have them meet somewhere in the middle by appropriating the wealth of the wealthy person for the benefit of the poor one, is an illusion.

The definition of poor versus wealthy is arbitray. It is also meaningless to discuss the number of wealthy persons versus poor persons. In many third world countries, almost all wealth is in the hands of the few. This gives them the economic and political power to maintain this system.

If all the money owned--not just the annual income--of the rich were distributed to the poor, the rich would be brought down, but the poor would remain poor, albeit with a few additional dollars. And when that was spent, of course there would be no additional monies coming from the formerly wealthy people.

Off hand, I recall that 50% of all wealth in the United States is owned by 10% of the population. Most of that is within 1% of the population.

There was a time in the world when people were born into wealth, being of noble blood. The social inequality was of divine origin. They deserved to be inside by the fire with their guests, while others, due to birth, labored most of the day, and all of their lives, in the hot and cold.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You might re-read the prophets, one of the greatest offenses to God was the treatment of the poor.
That's not a governmental issue. It's a personal or church issue.

Income inequality is a necessity of life, but it does not justify unregulated capitalism.
There isn't any "unregulated Capitalism" in our country. That concept exists only in the propaganda of the Far Left.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The concept of modern free market capitalism comes from the unchristian, disgusting view of Thomas Hobbes who believed human beings were nothing more than animals that found a way of living together in peace by agreeing to arbitrary, rather than instrinsic, rights.
That's interesting to read, considering that every historian knows that the emergence of Capitalism in Western society pre-dates Hobbes and had nothing to do with him.
 
Upvote 0