Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

People having different amounts of wealth is completely fair.

Not everyone works as hard as others.

Not everyone is as smart as others.

Not everyone has as much responsibility as others.

CEOs have a skill set and an importance that their workers do not have.

That is why they make more.

If wealth equality were a thing, that would be unfair.

It's not fair that someone who does not contribute as much, make as much as someone who works harder, and/or has more responsibility, and/or works smarter.

To some degree, but plenty of people are held back to an extreme degree by incurable ailments, both physical and mental. Such people will never have the ability to work 'hard' enough to 'succeed' and gain capital. Those people should not have to live in poverty.


Often one's ability to 'work hard' is due to inherent characteristics and upbringing, so I don't really have the same respect that some others do for 'self-made' millionaires etc. Well done, you were born with the correct characteristics to engage successfully with the capitalist model, and now you're hoarding all your wealth and doing **** all of use for anyone else with it.

Originally posted by Neon1234
People having different amounts of wealth is completely fair.

Not everyone works as hard as others.

Not everyone is as smart as others.

Not everyone has as much responsibility as others.

CEOs have a skill set and an importance that their workers do not have.

That is why they make more.

If wealth equality were a thing, that would be unfair.

It's not fair that someone who does not contribute as much, make as much as someone who works harder, and/or has more responsibility, and/or works smarter. Yet it's proven multiple times in history that when there is a large income inequality gap it shows that the system is unfair and broken where the wealthy abuse their wealth power to get more wealth until the economy collapses around them.

Originally posted by Newjak
Yet it's proven multiple times in history that when there is a large income inequality gap it shows that the system is unfair and broken where the wealthy abuse their wealth power to get more wealth until the economy collapses around them. didn't eon make exactly this thread with a different title a few weeks ago?

Originally posted by Newjak
Yet it's proven multiple times in history that when there is a large income inequality gap it shows that the system is unfair and broken where the wealthy abuse their wealth power to get more wealth until the economy collapses around them. Yes, the current corporate-capitalist system (a direct result of capitalism in general) is doomed to fall, eventually. The 'freedom' of the 'market' has lessened the liberty and freedom of those left in the shadow of those who have succeeded in playing the corporate game (Bezos, Gates, etc.). The middle class is eroding, and the chance of an individual getting lucky or making it big is a gap that is thinning at an alarming rate.


It's going to break, sooner or later (perhaps sooner than anyone expects). What will replace it is the real question.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
didn't eon make exactly this thread with a different title a few weeks ago?

No.

That thread was about people freeloading.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
didn't eon make exactly this thread with a different title a few weeks ago?

same fallacy and general theme. basically the same "the poor deserve to be poor, because they chose to be poor, or else why are they always poor" circular argument, except applied to the wealthy.

basically not-eon really really hates poor people, and needs to post many threads about it

Originally posted by Scribble
Yes, the current corporate-capitalist system (a direct result of capitalism in general) is doomed to fall, eventually. The 'freedom' of the 'market' has lessened the liberty and freedom of those left in the shadow of those who have succeeded in playing the corporate game (Bezos, Gates, etc.). The middle class is eroding, and the chance of an individual getting lucky or making it big is a gap that is thinning at an alarming rate.


It's going to break, sooner or later (perhaps sooner than anyone expects). What will replace it is the real question. Honestly I think necessity is going to have us go to a more Universal Income model. Specifically because at some point there are going to be more people capable of work then jobs to give them.

People will still be able to work in that type of society and there will still be capitalist elements.

I'm poor myself.

But I live a simple lifestyle.

And I know it's only temporary since I will graduate college in August 2022.

Originally posted by Newjak
Honestly I think necessity is going to have us go to a more Universal Income model. Specifically because at some point there are going to be more people capable of work then jobs to give them.

People will still be able to work in that type of society and there will still be capitalist elements.

btu thats comunism

Originally posted by Newjak
Honestly I think necessity is going to have us go to a more Universal Income model. Specifically because at some point there are going to be more people capable of work then jobs to give them.

People will still be able to work in that type of society and there will still be capitalist elements.

Why is more government the solution when more government is what got is here? Politicians are great at breaking your knees, then claiming you need them because they have a crutch.

Governments cannot create any money, and printing is another form of tax, the most destructive form ultimately

Originally posted by Neon1234
I'm poor myself.

But I live a simple lifestyle.

And I know it's only temporary since I will graduate college in August 2022.

btu will you have a job after college ?

that is the problem my engeneering family has

Originally posted by Neon1234
I'm poor myself.


more deception and gaslighting. you're a liar and a fraud, not-eon.

Originally posted by Superdad76
btu will you have a job after college ?

that is the problem my engeneering family has

I'm taking Business Accounting.

I am worried about finding a job after college.

We've all seen the stories about college grads working in retail or fast food.

Hopefully that doesn't happen to me.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Why is more government the solution when more government is what got is here? Politicians are great at breaking your knees, then claiming you need them because they have a crutch.

Governments cannot create any money, and printing is another form of tax, the most destructive form ultimately That is false statement to say government got us here. There is historical context to show capitalism always tends to go towards hi levels of income inequality until something comes into reset the status quo. Often times in American history this has been the U.S. government doing the much needed reset.

I noticed you mentioned that capitalism is the best mechanism we have to stop poverty. I don't completely agree or disagree with that statement. Ultimately a number of factors go into what allows individuals to come out of poverty.

For instance a lot of people like to cite China's rising income to show the greatness of capitalism. Yet most of those income increases have stagnated and still fall under the international poverty metrics and cost of living metrics.

Even in the U.S. income inequality is ballooning as more and more Americans go into poverty. The interesting thing is the biggest increases in income inequality tend to come from when Republicans control the government. Which is interesting because those are the times that capitalism is supposed to be set free.

The analogy I can come up with is that capitalism is like a fire. It can be very useful but if it's not controlled or reigned in it can cause even more damage then the problems it was solving.

Of course that isn't to say government can't wielded improperly either but a blanket capitalism good government bad stance is part of the reason we're at where we're at.

Originally posted by Scribble
Great. Doesn't mean it's going to last.

It's weighted toward exponential corruption and marginalisation, and so will eventually crack like any other model.
'Real Capitalism has never been tried', essentially. Capitalists use the same rhetoric as communists in this regard. Free-Market Capitalism would work if everyone was selfless, humble and generous, just as (anarcho) communism would work is everyone was selfless, humble and generous.

As it is, we have a corrupt society, leaning every more towards corruption. But, y'know, what can you do with people? They simply don't work.
UBI is very much becoming a clear direction to take, but people freak out and wail "it's communism!!" as if capitalism isn't already ****ing over most of us more and more each day. UBI is completely compatible with a free market system, for sure.


But I'm concerned that UBI combined with the corporate-capitalism we have now, combined with a burgeoning techno-industrial revolution, will leave a lot of people disenfranchised, marginalised, bereft of work, meaning, and any sense of hope for living. I think you hit the nail on the head with your description of real capitalism.

I agree you have to be careful about making sure people aren't feeling marginalized. I don't know if that would require a change societal in culture where one's worth is only associated with a job. It may also require more I'm not sure.

UBI is just a bandaid to crony capitalism.

Originally posted by Newjak
Yet it's proven multiple times in history that when there is a large income inequality gap it shows that the system is unfair and broken where the wealthy abuse their wealth power to get more wealth until the economy collapses around them. didn't eon make exactly this thread with a different title a few weeks ago?

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
didn't eon make exactly this thread with a different title a few weeks ago?

Originally posted by Neon1234
No.

That thread was about people freeloading.

I think Capitalism has a close amount of pros and cons.

I think a lot of people forget that, just because one is wealthy, he/she doesn't work hard.

I grew up in a wealthier family. My mother made a 6-figure income, but damn, I can't say I have met anyone yet that worked as hard as she did. I remember her getting stress breakdowns that were generated from her job.

@Scribble I don't disagree with your assessment of global elites.

A big myth people have, is that those that are well off, don't work hard.

@RoO

Government has limited capitalism overreach before in the past. Look at the coal miner issues and Union laws that all had to get passed to curb corporate enslavement in the U.S.

Child labor laws, work condition laws, employee benefit laws, laws that protect workers from unjust discrimination.

Like I said government often has been needed to curb corporate greed before in the past.

Just because it doesn't always step doesn't mean it doesn't play an important role.

Originally posted by Neon1234
A big myth people have, is that those that are well off, don't work hard. A bigger myth people have, is that those that are not well off, don't work hard.

Some of the hardest working people I know have worked in low income jobs.

Originally posted by Newjak
A bigger myth people have, is that those that are not well off, don't work hard.

Some of the hardest working people I know have worked in low income jobs. Absolutely.

Originally posted by Newjak
A bigger myth people have, is that those that are not well off, don't work hard.

Some of the hardest working people I know have worked in low income jobs. As I said, pros and cons.

The political arena should just stop talking about it.

Originally posted by Newjak
@Scribble I don't disagree with your assessment of global elites.
Originally posted by Newjak
A bigger myth people have, is that those that are not well off, don't work hard.

Some of the hardest working people I know have worked in low income jobs. Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Absolutely. Couldn't agree more.

Originally posted by victreebelvictr
As I said, pros and cons.

The political arena should just stop talking about it. Why should the political arena stop talking about it? :/

Originally posted by Newjak
Why should the political arena stop talking about it? :/

because you made a completely valid point which destroys their argument. so now the point needs to be deflected and derailed.

these are very stable people, btw; with much intellectual honesty and emotional maturity

Originally posted by Newjak
Why should the political arena stop talking about it? :/ Because it is rather irrelevant during the time of this pandemic.

Originally posted by victreebelvictr
Because it is rather irrelevant during the time of this pandemic. Actually it seems very relevant considering the economic impact this is having on millions of Americans.

Originally posted by Newjak
Actually it seems very relevant considering the economic impact this is having on millions of Americans. Exactly, until we repair the economy, I don't see how any of this is relevant.

Originally posted by victreebelvictr
Exactly, until we repair the economy, I don't see how any of this is relevant. First off income inequality is a very relevant topic. It's part of the reason our economy is struggling so hard.

Either way though even if you find it irrelevant we're discussing it on KMC. I don't think we have to worry about our conversations somehow influencing what congress is going to talk about lol.

Originally posted by Neon1234
People having different amounts of wealth is completely fair.

Not everyone works as hard as others.

Not everyone is as smart as others.

Not everyone has as much responsibility as others.

CEOs have a skill set and an importance that their workers do not have.

That is why they make more.

If wealth equality were a thing, that would be unfair.

It's not fair that someone who does not contribute as much, make as much as someone who works harder, and/or has more responsibility, and/or works smarter.

Wealth inequality could be fair, but it isn't in the world we live in. A lot of people that work harder, that are more skilled, that are more intelligent have less, while a lot of people that have no skills, that don't work hard or at all, that are not intelligent have a lot. That's just the reality. We don't live in a fair system, and the wealth inequality created by it isn't fair either.

A certain amount of wealth inequality is fair, but it's certainly not fair for the owners of companies to be worth billions, while a large number of their employees are on welfare or other forms of assistance.

Paying full-time employees enough to keep them off all forms of government assistance should be the bare minimum companies are required to pay.

Originally posted by Silent Master
A certain amount of wealth inequality is fair, but it's certainly not fair for the owners of companies to be worth billions, while a large number of their employees are on welfare or other forms of assistance.

Paying full-time employees enough to keep them off all forms of government assistance should be the bare minimum companies are required to pay.

I agree with this 100%.

Corporate Welfare is a scam for taxpayers.

Originally posted by victreebelvictr
Because it is rather irrelevant during the time of this pandemic. It's more pertinent than it's ever been, imo. The results of the pandemic are grinding small businesses to dust, all whilst Amazon's profits skyrocket. It's a disaster for the working classes, and much of the middle classes, too. Only the elites are not suffering.

Originally posted by Silent Master
A certain amount of wealth inequality is fair, but it's certainly not fair for the owners of companies to be worth billions, while a large number of their employees are on welfare or other forms of assistance.

Paying full-time employees enough to keep them off all forms of government assistance should be the bare minimum companies are required to pay. Originally posted by Neon1234
I agree with this 100%.

Corporate Welfare is a scam for taxpayers. 100%, the greed of corporations is completely on show, bared for all to see. If they don't care about us, why should we care about them?

Originally posted by Newjak
First off income inequality is a very relevant topic. It's part of the reason our economy is struggling so hard.

Either way though even if you find it irrelevant we're discussing it on KMC. I don't think we have to worry about our conversations somehow influencing what congress is going to talk about lol. That is true.

Just from my research of history, whenever a nation tries to change their economic values during crisis it either bombs or turns out great.

I guess it is kinda of a flip of the coin.

The best bet seems to be a capitalist society with socialist elements, the "hybrid."

Capitalism does overall seem better to alternatives that many people today, who grew up in a capitalist country, suggest though. People seem to forget that people fled those countries to capitalism. My gf has family who have told stories about their older family members growing up in communism, and it was hell.

Originally posted by Neon1234
People having different amounts of wealth is completely fair.

Not everyone works as hard as others.

Not everyone is as smart as others.

Not everyone has as much responsibility as others.

CEOs have a skill set and an importance that their workers do not have.

That is why they make more.

If wealth equality were a thing, that would be unfair.

It's not fair that someone who does not contribute as much, make as much as someone who works harder, and/or has more responsibility, and/or works smarter.

I agree. The issue isn't that some people deserve to be wealthier than others. It's the degree in the disparity.

In 1965 the average CEO earned 20 x what their average worker earned. It's now over 250 x.