Wealth
- Thread starter Duck_walk
- Start date
The poor are getting richer at an unparalleled rate compared to human history. Socialists are dumb. They seem to think all hierarchies of inequality are tyrannical. This can be a deadly flaw.
Inequality of wealth doesn't mean we should elect a bunch of socialist that sit in committee meetings with bureaucrats and decide on dumb ideas to fix complicated issues. They can't solve the problem, and not only that they will do the reverse of what is intended.
Do you think the game is rigged?
Last edited:
Lol I guarantee you're the toughest guy in your mom's basement.
Go outside, get some exercise. You might develop a sense of self worth and not need to belittle everything and everyone on a message board. Seriously, get help.
The bottom 10 percent of income earners in the most capitalist countries make, on average, 7 times more than the poorest 10 percent in the least free economies.
Similarly, more than 27 percent of people in the most socialist economies live in extreme poverty (as defined by the World Bank as an income of less than $1.90 a day), whereas just 1.8 percent of people in freest economies live in extreme poverty – a figure that is still too high (the optimal number is zero), but vastly better than the level that persists in the least free countries.
Economic measures aside, people living in the most capitalist countries also live on average 14 years longer, have an infant mortality rate 6 times lower, enjoy greater political and civil liberties, gender equality, and to the extent you can measure such things, greater happiness too – when compared to the least capitalist economies.
They find that the poverty rate fell from 13.0 percent in 1980 to 2.8 percent in 2018.
The middle class, it turns out, is shrinking. But not because they are falling into poverty, as some might have you believe. Rather, it is shrinking because more people are “moving on up,” ascending into a higher income bracket — and living the American dream.
Since 2016, the United States has had more wealthy households than middle-class households and the share of low-income households has reached a historic low. This is not new news.
According to the most recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2018, over 30 percent of U.S. households earned over $100,000 (i.e., the upper class). Fewer than 30 percent of households earned between $50,000 and $100,000 (i.e., the middle class). The share of U.S. households making at least $100,000 has more than tripled since 1967, when just 9 percent of all U.S. households earned that much (all figures are adjusted for inflation).
In 2018, the share of households earning less than $50,000 (i.e., the lower class) dropped below 40 percent for the first time since the U.S. Census data on this metric started to be collected in 1967. Back then, 54 percent of households earned less than $50,000.
If you want more data to back up the fact the Democrat party is FOS. I will glad to post it. It's hard to keep up, they lie so much.
People won't elect them if things are good. People won't watch the fake news unless it's outrageous. Too much competition. KAG
Articles like this only look at data from the top percent of the richest. Those who invest in foreign markets, entrepreneurs, real estate or in this case new billionaires. I guess new rich people are a bad thing?
This article is totally misleading for dumb socialist, which jumps to the trickle-down fallacy conclusion (see skeleton) since poor people are dependent on purchasing power at the local level and do not have investments. Not only this, wealth inequality is declining worldwide, but only in capitalist friendly nations, lol.
The rich are getting richer in capitalist friendly nations but the poor are not getting poorer. The poor were getting poorer, until the '90s. But we both know what happened. Wars declined, walls fell and freedom of capitalism was allowed to flourish.
Do you ever look for statistics that show upward mobility? News flash, people that were poor 10-20 years ago are now richer. If the rich get richer it is going to look like this is true, but it's not true if they are not the same people.
This is not to say everything is perfect. Economic policy, Cronyism, lousy education for the poo, barriers against the poor, etc. Lots of room for improvement. But the system is not rigged. The dam Socialists look at statistics for economic progress that are fundamentally flawed. Bernie is a liar.
Last edited:
There is plenty of room for improvement. Things are far from perfect. Your party is not good at problem-solving. The dumb people have taken over.
First, the problem-solvers must look at why health care costs have skyrocketed. Do they know the answer? They find scapegoats but that doesn't answer why? Historically, and in similar sectors, we have developed the efficiency of labor to lower costs. Medical AI is a promising possibility. It costs more to hire Drs. Nurses, Teachers and Education for them, and labor-intensive fields are difficult to regulate. More online Medical programs. Who wants to be a Dr. if the wages are low? So the costs rise. Efficiency is the key. A software engineer can do as well.
The government takes over the HC industry doesn't strike me as efficient. Lol.
It also costs the economy more for people to remain in professions like teaching or Orchestras or low productivity sectors. This happens when you have a good economy. KAG
Last edited:
