So sick of hearing the term 1 percent

[deutshwise]

I am sick of people bashing successful people for being successful. I worked for a pretty big corporation that was once run by a very rich person (Steve Jobs). He took risks to build a company and gave me along with thousands of other people the chance to work and make a very good living. I don't see the asshole on welfare that is to lazy to work give people the chance to make a good living. why the fuck are we demonizing people who have worked hard in life? Seriously

[Boosted FC]

We live in a different time now. Very different.

[geoff]

Why work if everything you need is provided to you? I am a business owner and provide employment to 5 people. I'm sure they are not jealous of how much I make. Everyone in America has the same opportunity to succeed as anyone else. I found a really good quote I wanna post up here.

[geoff]

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

[Sinfix_15]

That's politics. A bunch of professional arguers using every moment of air time to try and persuade an impressionable voter who might be listening. It's kinda of sad how being rich is a bad thing now and everyone demonizes it. I thought everyone in american wanted to be rich? I guess the new american dream is to live off food stamps and welfare.

[bu villain]

I guess my perception is very different from yours. I don't know anyone who looks down on people for being rich or successful (they aren't necessarily the same by the way). Maybe I don't hang out with the kind of people you do. Most people who look down on Steve Jobs do it because he was an asshole, not because he was successful.

[.blank cd]

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

I hate hearing this quote. The propaganda is so thick you can cut it with a steak knife.

[.blank cd]

I guess my perception is very different from yours. I don't know anyone who looks down on people for being rich or successful (they aren't necessarily the same by the way). Maybe I don't hang out with the kind of people you do. Most people who look down on Steve Jobs do it because he was an asshole, not because he was successful.

I don't know anyone who hates rich people for being rich either, and I hang out with people on both ends of the spectrum. There are a couple rich people I hate because they're genuine douchebags.

[hondaxpurt]

I don't know anyone who hates rich people for being rich either, and I hang out with people on both ends of the spectrum. There are a couple rich people I hate because they're genuine douchebags.

Why don't you just call my name out next time? Geez....

[.blank cd]

Why don't you just call my name out next time? Geez....

Actually I do hate you cause you're rich. Lol

[BanginJimmy]

I hate hearing this quote. The propaganda is so thick you can cut it with a steak knife.

Which one are you talking about? As far as I can tell, they are all a bit cliche but true.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[.blank cd]

Which one are you talking about? As far as I can tell, they are all a bit cliche but true.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

All of it.

1. You can absolutely legislate poor into prosperity by legislating wealthy out of it. It might not pass, it might not work as well as you want it, it might end violently, and you might create a paradox, but you can do it. There's actually a word for it, a word that right wing talking heads like to throw around to describe a certain POTUS, yet have not actually seen it in practice.

2. "What one person receives without working for, another must work for without receiving." I suppose that's a quip at taxes for public assistance programs. I guess we need to get it into our heads that this isn't going away. It's something that benefits the society as a whole. Don't like public assistance programs, stop paying taxes.

In practice, I can absolutely give something to someone I've worked for and received.

4. You can't multiply wealth by dividing it? Since when? Stock market and bank loans both divide money to multiply it. Every single day. Bank A gives $10,000 business loan to customer B. B starts business and makes $1mil. B pays back A with interest, and you have effectively multiplied your money by dividing the banks money, and the bank has multiplied its money by dividing its own money.

[.blank cd]

And 5, studies of human psychology have shown that people aren't always collectively depreciative.

[BanginJimmy]

All of it.

1. You can absolutely legislate poor into prosperity by legislating wealthy out of it. It might not pass, it might not work as well as you want it, it might end violently, and you might create a paradox, but you can do it. There's actually a word for it, a word that right wing talking heads like to throw around to describe a certain POTUS, yet have not actually seen it in practice.

wrong. You can use legislation to take 10000 self made rich people (trust fund babies dont count) and take every penny they have, at the same time you can take 10000 self made poor people and give them $10 mil. Look back in 10 years. The vast majority of rich people will be rich again, the poor will be poor again. The reason is simple, the rich do certain things to become rich, they will continue to do so. Poor people do certain things to become poor, they will also continue to do those things.

As for socialism, can you point out any place where it works? All I ever see from socialism is the top coming down, I never see the bottom coming up.

2. "What one person receives without working for, another must work for without receiving." I suppose that's a quip at taxes for public assistance programs. I guess we need to get it into our heads that this isn't going away. It's something that benefits the society as a whole. Don't like public assistance programs, stop paying taxes.

In practice, I can absolutely give something to someone I've worked for and received.

Yes, its a shot at tax money and at handout programs. Where does the govt get money? End of discussion.

4. You can't multiply wealth by dividing it? Since when? Stock market and bank loans both divide money to multiply it. Every single day. Bank A gives $10,000 business loan to customer B. B starts business and makes $1mil. B pays back A with interest, and you have effectively multiplied your money by dividing the banks money, and the bank has multiplied its money by dividing its own money.

I believe this was directed at individuals, not business deals. A business deal that is completed by all parties benefits all parties. At the same time, a business deal such as the one you described, wealth shifts from one party to another, none is actually created.

[.blank cd]

You can use legislation to take 10000 self made rich people (trust fund babies dont count) and take every penny they have, at the same time you can take 10000 self made poor people and give them $10 mil.

So yes, you can do it, but it won't work the way you want it to.

As for socialism, can you point out any place where it works? All I ever see from socialism is the top coming down, I never see the bottom coming up.

Communism was the word I was looking for

I believe this was directed at individuals, not business deals. A business deal that is completed by all parties benefits all parties. At the same time, a business deal such as the one you described, wealth shifts from one party to another, none is actually created.

Why does it matter how and where the money changed hands? If someone profited from the deal, that's all that matters. If I have $1mil and I give you $10000, and you make $10000 off of my loan and give me back all +10% interest, I am now wealthier, and you are wealthier because I divided my wealth with you.

[ahabion]

Why does it matter how and where the money changed hands? If someone profited from the deal, that's all that matters. If I have $1mil and I give you $10000, and you make $10000 off of my loan and give me back all +10% interest, I am now wealthier, and you are wealthier because I divided my wealth with you.

IRS will be happy to take your divided anything. Send them a check and let them know to pay you back with interest and tell us how it goes. Just as you preach, as long as someone is making money and profiting from the deal, that's all that matters.

[.blank cd]

IRS will be happy to take your divided anything. Send them a check and let them know to pay you back with interest and tell us how it goes. Just as you preach, as long as someone is making money and profiting from the deal, that's all that matters.

What does the IRS have to do with anything?

[BanginJimmy]

Why does it matter how and where the money changed hands? If someone profited from the deal, that's all that matters. If I have $1mil and I give you $10000, and you make $10000 off of my loan and give me back all +10% interest, I am now wealthier, and you are wealthier because I divided my wealth with you.

But when dealing with tax money, that first million had to be taken from someone else and they get no compensation for it.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[.blank cd]

But when dealing with tax money, that first million had to be taken from someone else and they get no compensation for it.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Before, you said it was directed to individuals. Is this quote referring to tax money, or is it just referring to money in general? The quote doesn't specifically mention taxes. Maybe they should change the quote to "The tax money one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving." and "You can't multiply someones tax money by dividing someone else's tax money". Just to specify.

[BanginJimmy]

Before, you said it was directed to individuals. Is this quote referring to tax money, or is it just referring to money in general? The quote doesn't specifically mention taxes. Maybe they should change the quote to "The tax money one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving." and "You can't multiply someones tax money by dividing someone else's tax money". Just to specify.

If you want to play semantics go ahead. We both know the context of those quotes.