You work your butt off, and a rich dude does nothing and gets rich - how?

[runam0k]

Because money makes money and the rich get richer.  Inheritance all but guarantees ever increasing disparity.  Sad but true.  The argument that trickle down occurs is flawed (or at least it does nothing to address the increasing disparity).

[1714831299]

1714831299

[1714831299]

1714831299

[1714831299]

1714831299

[Ron~Popeil]

Why are house prices so high? http://ozziecoin.com/?p=1514

Housing bubble = get quick rich scheme, fueled by cheap credit, from the idiot savante middle upper class who can't figure out a better way to acquire money.

Bitcoin bubble = get quick rich scheme, fueled by an-cap paranoia, from the ibtards who can't figure out a better way to acquire money. 

Funny how they are but two sides of the same coin.

Except Bitcoin doesn't interfere with access to affordable shelter.

Imagine if water was commercialized and made a huge bubble and was priced out of the stratosphere that the only way to afford it would be debt?  Lol

Don't give them any ideas. 

[twiifm]

Why are house prices so high? http://ozziecoin.com/?p=1514

Housing bubble = get quick rich scheme, fueled by cheap credit, from the idiot savante middle upper class who can't figure out a better way to acquire money.

Bitcoin bubble = get quick rich scheme, fueled by an-cap paranoia, from the ibtards who can't figure out a better way to acquire money. 

Funny how they are but two sides of the same coin.

Except Bitcoin doesn't interfere with access to affordable shelter.

Imagine if water was commercialized and made a huge bubble and was priced out of the stratosphere that the only way to afford it would be debt?  Lol

Imagine if water was contained in a lake 21 million Liters in size and half of it has already been claimed the only way to share it is to split the rest amongst every unborn child from here til eternity.  LOL 

[RodeoX]

I hope you realize that it was you working your butt off that got that dude rich. You are how it happened.

[TaunSew]

I hope you realize that it was you working your butt off that got that dude rich. You are how it happened.

If that were the case then all the construction subtrade contractors would be wealthy (when most are only middle upper class at best).  The rich in our society either made money off cheap credit, monopolies and/or franchising.

[Ron~Popeil]

I hope you realize that it was you working your butt off that got that dude rich. You are how it happened.

If that were the case then all the construction subtrade contractors would be wealthy (when most are only middle upper class at best).  The rich in our society either made money off cheap credit, monopolies and/or franchising.

A lot of them got rich with a great idea, hard work, and smart decisions. There is definitely a lot of people that rode a system of theft to great wealth but to say that about all wealthy people is simply wrong.

[Ron~Popeil]

Because money makes money and the rich get richer.  Inheritance all but guarantees ever increasing disparity.  Sad but true.  The argument that trickle down occurs is flawed (or at least it does nothing to address the increasing disparity).

So I don't have the right to pass the fruit of my life long labor to my wife and children? Who then is entitled to steal my hard work? A government looter? You?

[Ozziecoin]

This thread isn't about inheritance tax. It is about the ability of FRB to create wealth for the wealthy because of the mere fact that they hold assets. Please read page 1 if unsure.

[DolanDuck]

The “increasing lopsidedness in terms of wealth accumulation at the top end” would not be so dramatic if median wealth was also increasing. (Mike Santoli)

[lightfoot]

Wow this thread clearly crush "dreamers" 

There are enough evidence, everywhere in the world, where people with "Poor" backgrounds, excelled in life, and made it big.

Bill Gates started in his garage {Today he is the richest man alive}

My neighbor came to our "3rd world" country with only a bag of clothes. 45 years later he pensioned a millionaire, and I am the poor bastard next door, spoiling his view. Ha ha ha.

And there are thousands of these examples of poor people making it big. {Those are the good stories, that catch the news, not the wealthy rich boy, who inherit millions}

Will the rich get richer, yes they will.. Do poor people, have no change, of making it big? No way.   

Gates was hardly from a poor background. Yes he made a lot of money, but never, NEVER forget that a good part of that was because he was in the office the day Digital Research was out hang-gliding. When IBM came a-calling he was there. Was that hard work? Sure. Was that also luck? Sure.

I remember these guys from the ITS days, and when Gates was writing code for the Model 100. Luck played a bigger part than you might want to acknowledge.

And I know plenty of people who founded companies in the 90's dot.com boom and the late 90's Internet boom. Some made a lot of money, then lost it all on their next investment. Because they confused their "luck" with "skill" and "smartz".

That said, studies have shown that social mobility in the US is stagnated. It's a lot harder to drop from rich to poor, and a lot harder to move from poor to rich. Easier to fall out of middle class, harder to move from middle-rich. That's not an opinion, that's a simple flat fact.

My own story of dropping out of HS to where I am now (quite happy and comfortable) is kind of cool, but it really helped that I was sleeping on the right steam grate when the opportunity arose. I credit my skills, my friendly manner, but I *never* forget that luck played a part, along with my upbringing (son of an AT&T manager in the 70's. Got a lot of cool things to play with as a kid).

[Ozziecoin]

I'm really wondering whether the US even has a "middle class" anymore.

[practicaldreamer]

That said, studies have shown that social mobility in the US is stagnated. It's a lot harder to drop from rich to poor, and a lot harder to move from poor to rich. Easier to fall out of middle class, harder to move from middle-rich. That's not an opinion, that's a simple flat fact.

Yes - social mobility studies provide us with the facts that they'd prefer we didn't know about - they'd much prefer to "big up" the guy who dragged himself from the gutter to go on to make a million. Even though it hardly ever happens. But if you live in hope you won't die in despair etc etc - its almost like the opium of the masses these days, having displaced religion, this illusion/self delusion of personal freedom.

Luck played a bigger part than you might want to acknowledge.

... Some made a lot of money, then lost it all on their next investment. Because they confused their "luck" with "skill" and "smartz".


 ...I credit my skills, my friendly manner, but I *never* forget that luck played a part

I've got to say Lightfoot, yours is one of the better posts I have read of late - because by acknowledging your good fortune/luck you are showing humility - and humility is a trait sadly lacking these days in most people. They love to tell you about how they didn't have it easy and had to struggle - even those that blatantly had it laid on a plate - because having the good grace to acknowledge their own good fortune would be a severe hit to their own cherished image of themselves. Its the vanity of it that gets my blood up.

   I've done OK too - I have been lucky - of course I could tell you all a real hard luck story - but the truth is that if I'd been born with a darker skin a few thousand miles south of where I currently reside I wouldn't have 2 bits to scratch my arse with, and if I'd been born where I am now, but maybe 75 years earlier I may have perished in the Great War.

    No - luck plays a much bigger part in all our lives than we care to imagine.

   The 85 who own half this world just won't admit it, thats all. I wonder why   ?

[TwinWinNerD]

@OP. You have logical flaw in your argument in the opening post.

Increased money supply is actually a bad thing for people that hold FIAT or investments that depend on the value of fiat. It is good for people/countries that have lot of debt.

Obviously this flaw doesn't change the fact that the kapitalism is sucking money from the workin folks and distributing upwards

[Robert Paulson]

@OP. You have logical flaw in your argument in the opening post.

Increased money supply is actually a bad thing for people that hold FIAT or investments that depend on the value of fiat. It is good for people/countries that have lot of debt.

Obviously this flaw doesn't change the fact that the kapitalism is sucking money from the workin folks and distributing upwards

capitalism doesn't suck money out of anybody, capitalism is about trading things with one another.
every free trade is beneficial to both parties of the trade, otherwise it wouldn't have happened.
rich people are simply people who produced so much goods and services that people want that they were able to trade them for alot of money.

[TwinWinNerD]

@OP. You have logical flaw in your argument in the opening post.

Increased money supply is actually a bad thing for people that hold FIAT or investments that depend on the value of fiat. It is good for people/countries that have lot of debt.

Obviously this flaw doesn't change the fact that the kapitalism is sucking money from the workin folks and distributing upwards

capitalism doesn't suck money out of anybody, capitalism is about trading things with one another.
every free trade is beneficial to both parties of the trade, otherwise it wouldn't have happened.
rich people are simply people who produced so much goods and services that people want that they were able to trade them for alot of money.

I was talking about the fact that capitalism is called capitalism because capital is working for you if you have it.

You don't need to produce goods or services. That is the point. Todays financial markets might have basis that creates that stuff, but the way money is made with money previously owned has nothing to do with that anymore (or atleast only remotley).

[Ozziecoin]

@OP. You have logical flaw in your argument in the opening post.

Increased money supply is actually a bad thing for people that hold FIAT or investments that depend on the value of fiat. It is good for people/countries that have lot of debt.

Obviously this flaw doesn't change the fact that the kapitalism is sucking money from the workin folks and distributing upwards

capitalism doesn't suck money out of anybody, capitalism is about trading things with one another.
every free trade is beneficial to both parties of the trade, otherwise it wouldn't have happened.
rich people are simply people who produced so much goods and services that people want that they were able to trade them for alot of money.

please read my explanation on pg 1. FRB is enriching asset holders at the expense of those with no assets. If you disagree; cite evidence, not opinion.

[NotLambchop]

...
capitalism doesn't suck money out of anybody, capitalism is about trading things with one another.
every free trade is beneficial to both parties of the trade, otherwise it wouldn't have happened.
rich people are simply people who produced so much goods and services that people want that they were able to trade them for alot of money.

Sure.
When I stick a gun in your face and tell you to hand over your money, the proposed exchange is beneficial to both parties--I get your money and you get your life.  Win/win.

Re. ur definition of "rich people": Rich people are simply people with more money than poor people, no need to complicate things.  They are rich regardless of how said money was acquired--through production, manipulation, or theft.
If you were rich at the time I stuck my gun in your face, you are now poor [after, presumably, producing "so much goods and services"], and I am rich.

[tinof]

"Capitalism" means the society value capital and not labor.

Hence, people who know how to manage money get ahead of the games.

[Robert Paulson]

...
capitalism doesn't suck money out of anybody, capitalism is about trading things with one another.
every free trade is beneficial to both parties of the trade, otherwise it wouldn't have happened.
rich people are simply people who produced so much goods and services that people want that they were able to trade them for alot of money.

Sure.
When I stick a gun in your face and tell you to hand over your money, the proposed exchange is beneficial to both parties--I get your money and you get your life.  Win/win.

Re. ur definition of "rich people": Rich people are simply people with more money than poor people, no need to complicate things.  They are rich regardless of how said money was acquired--through production, manipulation, or theft.
If you were rich at the time I stuck my gun in your face, you are now poor [after, presumably, producing "so much goods and services"], and I am rich.

i said that every free trade is beneficial to both parties.
if you rob someone by force then obviously the trade isn't free, that isn't capitalism.

@OP. You have logical flaw in your argument in the opening post.

Increased money supply is actually a bad thing for people that hold FIAT or investments that depend on the value of fiat. It is good for people/countries that have lot of debt.

Obviously this flaw doesn't change the fact that the kapitalism is sucking money from the workin folks and distributing upwards

capitalism doesn't suck money out of anybody, capitalism is about trading things with one another.
every free trade is beneficial to both parties of the trade, otherwise it wouldn't have happened.
rich people are simply people who produced so much goods and services that people want that they were able to trade them for alot of money.

please read my explanation on pg 1. FRB is enriching asset holders at the expense of those with no assets. If you disagree; cite evidence, not opinion.

i agree with you, FRB is fraud, it has nothing to do with capitalism either.
capitalism and free markets don't exist anywhere in the world today.

[NotLambchop]

...
capitalism doesn't suck money out of anybody, capitalism is about trading things with one another.
every free trade is beneficial to both parties of the trade, otherwise it wouldn't have happened.
rich people are simply people who produced so much goods and services that people want that they were able to trade them for alot of money.

Sure.
When I stick a gun in your face and tell you to hand over your money, the proposed exchange is beneficial to both parties--I get your money and you get your life.  Win/win.

Re. ur definition of "rich people": Rich people are simply people with more money than poor people, no need to complicate things.  They are rich regardless of how said money was acquired--through production, manipulation, or theft.
If you were rich at the time I stuck my gun in your face, you are now poor [after, presumably, producing "so much goods and services"], and I am rich.

i said that every free trade is beneficial to both parties.
if you rob someone by force then obviously the trade isn't free, that isn't capitalism.
...

You'e free to turn me down.  You might get shot, but you're free to choose [between your money and your life].
Just like you're free not to work in my factory--you might starve, but the choice is yours.
Just like you're free to leave my country if you don't like my laws--other countries might not be much different/won't take you, but you're always free to try your luck elsewhere.