income inequality

[childofGod1]

I would rather not share a society with people who appear to not care about other human beings.

Hey, they're not my kids, but sadly I'm stuck in a society with them...

If your fellow man's appearance bothers you so much, you should leave. The rest of us are perfectly happy to share the world with every human being God created.

Actually in all reality I'd rather see all the poor inner city kids helped than one single penny of my taxes go to support anything that helps your kids or ChildofGod's kids. But I can't control where those taxes go. So money gets spent on police in your neighborhoods, caring for your kids and money goes to public schools that serve your kids and I simply have no control over that.

If you got the government out of the charity business, you could pick and choose which children to help. Of course, when I'm giving to charity, I choose the children who can benefit from the help the most, but I guess if you want to base your choices on whether you agree with their parent's politics or not, that's up to you, as long as it's your own money you're using.

So the individuals owe nothing to the society?

By George, I think he's got it!

 

[Viren]

Those oversized corporations with ten thousand different divisions in different markets and different industries are definitely not immune to competition. Yes, left alone, market forces will break them up over time.

If the corporation is big enough can't it just undercut prices on it's competition?

Standard Oil once controled 90% of the U.S. market and either bought out all their competition or uncut their prices just so they could raise them to whatever they wanted when the competition was gone.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I hoped that you would read what I wrote, but, as usual, you've misread it. I said that Jourdan was not CONSUMED by envy. One of the Ten Commandments is "Thou shalt not covet..." There is no exception for some covetousness. Christians are told not to be covetous because it stops us from appreciating what we DO have and making the most of it. Jourdan didn't allow bitterness, envy, and anger to dictate his behavior and destroy the opportunities he had or his family. INSTEAD of whining, he went to work improving his life. He could have spent his time raging against his circumstances, but as bad as they were, he rose above. When faced with difficulties and unfairness, whatever the source, I hope I can behave as admirably as this former slave did. I have no idea why anyone wouldn't find his story inspiring.

There are many ways in which one may work to improve one's life. The problem is that you have characterised one of these ways as "whining" and "envy", and by that measure a freed slave who recognised the systemic unfairness of being paid less than a white man for identical work would be seen as "whining" or "coveting". It sounds like you want to say "Shut up. Play the game, even though it's rigged in your disfavour. If you don't, then you're just envious and a whiner."

Those oversized corporations with ten thousand different divisions in different markets and different industries are definitely not immune to competition. Yes, left alone, market forces will break them up over time.

To be frank, that is rather naive. The whole point is that these "oversized" corporations are able to make themselves more-or-less immune to competition by using their superior economic leverage to block a potential competitor's access to the field, thereby securing their grip on the market. This reduces competition and leads to a consolidation of gains. Without competition the number of choices available to consumers decreases.

It is interesting though that you should use the word "oversized". It carries with it the implication that a corporation can get "too big". But we are told by conservative commentators that the size of a corporation shouldn't concern us, and that it certainly isn't grounds for treating large corporations differently from smaller businesses. By admitting that corporations can be "oversized" are you not in fact acknowledging that they can hold a disproportionate amount of economic influence?

By George, I think he's got it!

I am curious as to how you would justify that point of view. The notion that you owe nothing to society seems strange (even anti-social) to me. Is it bound together with "every man is an island" kind of thinking?

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

If the corporation is big enough can't it just undercut prices on it's competition?

Standard Oil once controled 90% of the U.S. market and either bought out all their competition or uncut their prices just so they could raise them to whatever they wanted when the competition was gone.

So in terms of oil, gasoline, and kerosene, were we better off when Standard Oil controlled most of it?