I just don't understand how pol can defend this...
>>80298204
most of pol isn't american
What is there to defend you fucking idiot
We goyim will always be at the bottom nothing will change
Wait for it to trickle down...
>>80298204
Who's defending it?
(Other than the Jews in here)
I don't defend it. I hate it.
and it's gotten worse since clinton due to democrat policies, which allegedly tackled this exact issue
Is this saved wealth (assets), or income? If it's income then the whole question is deceptive.
>>80299884
>>80299990
PEOPLE ON POL DEFEND THE RICH ALL THE TIME!
>>80300225
Not an argument.
>>80298204
pareto principle motherfucker
Canada is probably nearly the same
>>80298204
dont worry, the jews telling you we need to eliminate taxes on all corporations, end all regulations and import millions of immigrant workers while also outsourcing jobs, that will fix everything, should be here any second now
>>80298204
I can't even read this graph
I assume it's trying to say 80% of the wealth is in 20% of the people's hands?
That or it's a pollen index and we're in the red zone (a fact I've known for YEARS!)
>>80300364
I wasn't arguing anything
IT IS A GOD DAMN FACT. what are you a new fag, a dumbass?
>>80300667
>I can't even read this graph
Are you blind, Jesus dude kys
>>80300371
>Canada is probably nearly the same
SO???
>>80300667
Its a fucking retarded graph. I still don't see the problem though.
>>80300943
>Its a fucking retarded graph. I still don't see the problem though.
Lol. You really don't see a problem?
This is why whites will die.
Even the le "red pilled" faggots LOVE being slaves
>>80298204
Somewhere between the actual distribution and the top one looks alright to me, the socialist snownigger.
>>80300225
People's "ideal" wealth distribution is true communism wealth distribution. For the top 20% to only have 30% of the wealth, there would have to have nearly equal wealth distribution. It would literally be impossible to get ahead through hard work. So the lazy have just as much chance of being in the top 20% as the bottom 20%. Well, I'm pretty lazy myself. But I've worked hard to get myself into the top 20% so I can retire early. And I guarantee I can find a way to work less than all you stupid fucks, and still be in the top 20% in this "ideal" wealth distribution model. The only difference is if we had the "ideal" wealth distribution, I'd be living in the same run down shack as all the stupid losers. Those dumbasses would have a far lower standard of living than they do now, but they'd be more content because I didn't have the opportunity to do better than them in overall wealth.
>>80300905
it's endemic to all economic systems
Sweden, UK, Venezuela, US, in just about all countries the top fifth richest own probably within the 75%-85% range of wealth
if any place is more equal than this, it's very likely that the place is just very poor or insignificant
>>80298204
Why do you care if somebody makes more money? Is it jealously? I don't give a shit, rich people don't ruin my day.
>>80300687
You said
>I just don't understand how pol can defend this...
I said
>Who's defending it?
THEN YOU SAID
>PEOPLE ON POL DEFEND THE RICH ALL THE TIME!
How the fuck is wealth distribution in America and the Third Rich related in any way?
kys
>>80302274
oh fuck me...
>>80302022
>>80301946
I agree with both of you.
The part I don't like is that the top 1% has pretty much half of the top 20% (pic related)
>>80302468
I think higher taxes on inheritance would help with this... Maybe 80% for the highest 1% and go lower from there. There would be the same incentive for people to work hard to make it into the top 1%, but people who don't do a damn thing to earn it wouldn't benefit so much.
For instance, if I hire my son to work for me, he would pay his 20% tax rare. But if I give him $5000 under current rules, he wouldn't pay anything. How is that fair? Of course there are loopholes to avoid this, but it's much harder to hide a billion $ inheritance that the top 1% would be leaving after their death. It would help lower taxes on people like me who earns a good living, but is paying too much in tax.
>>80298204
How is it illogical? Why would poor people living paycheck to paycheck have any wealth? It makes sense if you've taken a survey course in economics or spend more than 5 seconds actually thinking about it.
IMHO what makes capitalism dangerous isn't the unequal distribution, it's the fact that it requires constant growth to be sustainable. Once the growth stagnates or reverses, the market ceases to function.
>>80300225
Most Americans can't do basic math, more news at 10.
>>80301359
I don't think you understand how wealth accumulation works and how the rich have gotten richer.
>>80304701
>how
this thread was never about how
>>80302468
Oh come on what for.
What wealth does a middle class family want beyond a paid house and some savings?
>>80303309
>I think higher taxes on inheritance would help with this... Maybe 80% for the highest 1% and go lower from there.
lul no.
If you amassed considerable wealth you are pretty much playing god mode. If somebody tries to chimp out on you and steal 80% you have plenty of ways to avoid this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRLAKD-Vuvk#t=11m30s
>>80300225
We only do that when communism is presented as an answer to solving those inequalities (it doesn't) and commie shitlords think that people with wealth don't deserve rights ("hurrr make them pay 99% taxes they have money to spare")
>>80298204
WEALTH IS NOT A ZERO SUM GAME, RETARD
Without the wealthy top 20%, we'd just be 60%-80% poorer with no one left to invest in the jobs that are created for the bottom 80%.
>>80305373
>.
The middle class is having a hard time supporting more than one or two kids.
You know, the white middle class? The thing that's been shrinking for years?
Your argument is childlike. "What more does the middle class want?". Hmmmm let's think...
>>80305393
Not 80% of their total wealth you moron. Do you know how taxes work?
>>80298204
>motherjones is the source
OK
>>80298204
Most Americans are lazy shits, who cares
>>80305871
That's more concerned with income distribution though, not wealth distribution.
Although wealth does produce income, I don't think everyone in the 50s was leasing apartments to make half their living.
>>80305816
>Without the wealthy top 20%, we'd just be 60%-80% poorer
Wow this would really make me think if I was 15 years old
because the rich people earned it :/ i guess
Winners aren't losers. Nobody likes losers.
Why are they in the "top 20%"? Why haven't they advanced to 4th highest or middle? We are not living in a genuine free market libertarian society, that's why. We are keeping subhuman trailer trash/niggers on life support with checks. In a Traditionalist Libertarian society these vermin wouldn't survive.
These leftists advocate for a Marxist society where wealth is forcibly redistributed to the subhumans, and those subhumans thus have more resources to irresponsibly breed, eventually impoverishing everyone since more wealth has to be evenly distributed. After the tipping point is reached, the society will be in mass chaos and everyone has to fend for themselves in a very impoverished free market society. 80% of the population will perish.
>>80306339
Or you picked up an economics textbook?
https://mises.org/library/capitalism-treatise-economics
>>80306657
Truth
>>80298204
(((OY VEY!!!)))
>>80306657
>In a Traditionalist Libertarian society these vermin wouldn't survive.
>people would just lie down and die
So how were your grades in 10th school year? Are fractions giving you a hardtime?
>>80298204
communist bait.
"equality" is impossible.
>>80298204
People are stupid, who knew?
>>80298204
The money is fake. What they do at the top doesn't affect me.
When they and the government stops investing, that's when the shtf.
>>80306657
>Traditionalist Libertarian society
Since the rich people have decided to replace us with violent murderous terrorists I dont think it will be long before they are plucked from their homes by an angry mob. Unless they flee to china or brazil I guess.
>>80300225
The "What Americans think it is" is actually pretty much exactly what Australias distribution looks like.
>>80306814
(((the 1%)))
>>80298204
> give people money they don't deserve
>implying wealth is finite
>not understanding what the stock market is
>actually suggesting that it's hard to succeed when you can make a living selling dildos these days
>inequality is bad
>prosperity is the default human condition, not the exception
Wew
>>80298204
>smartest people get the most money
>dumbest get the least
What's not to understand?
>>80306875
>people would just lie down and die
The current "top 20%" either start putting in effort and abandon the checks OR starve and wither away while expecting someone to provide for them. Of course this will cause mass unrest, but this phase can be survived.
>>80307105
Practically minarchy imposed onto a society where everyone has traditional moral values. A step up from the usual "weed lmao" libertarianism where small government/minarchy/ancap is applied to a society in Kali Yuga.
>>80307081
>What they do at the top doesn't affect me
AHA AHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>>80307599
Wow! Your argument was way shittier than you thought it would be
>>80307978
That's so passive aggressive that I can't stand it. If his argument is bad then tell him why. The only reason that you wouldn't immediately do so is that you can't.
Pompous swine.
>>80307776
>Of course this will cause mass unrest, but this phase can be survived
This phase can also be the downfall of a country. Even if you can defend yourself from the hordes, then you have to worry about outside intervention from other countries.
>guys let's just tax all the rich people what could possibly go wrong
This thread baka
>>80307776
>Of course this will cause mass unrest
>starving people would cause "masss unrest"
holy fuck, i thought you were baiting for replies, but Jesus, that is one retarded comment
>Practically minarchy imposed onto a society where everyone has traditional moral values. A step up from the usual "weed lmao" libertarianism where small government/minarchy/ancap is applied to a society in Kali Yuga.
So only a ideology?
>>80306063
>Not 80% of their total wealth you moron. Do you know how taxes work?
Yo fatburger. You know how INHERITANCE tax works?
It takes a percentage of your total wealth. Even in Nigerica.
why don't the poor buy some money and then buy some stocks or funds?
>>80308149
Because under these circumstances natural behavior or base human living is irrelevant.
We don't live like that anymore and we haven't for generations and generations.
Wealth is not... The stuff you own entirely. Once you get rich enough, it's mostly investments. Wealth is control of money more than spending of money on yourself. So the top 1% controls investment of all that money. It's not like they are literally taking 20% of the countries resources and personally using it so it's not available to anyone else. They are controlling what it's invested to and that's good because these are the people who have shown themselves to be able to invest money practically.
>>80308645
no, it's not literally this thread. Low IQ ?
>>80308805
>Baww it's the current year, why isn't everyone prosperous and happy?
>>80308711
>starving people would cause mass unrest.
How is that retarded? It's logical that once people are starving they start chimping out.
>So an ideology?
Yes.
>>80308805
You're contradicting yourself. Your data shows wealth inequality, yet you're trying to argue that inequality isn't natural? Yet you're trying to argue that we need governmental regulation to curb it?
You're a big ball of hypocrisy. It's to mankind's shame that you came here with such an ego.
>>80298204
>survey of 5,000
Where did they survey this?
>>80309010
because that is what I'm saying? Nope not at all.
You yourself sound like a liberal. But go ahead keep making that straw man. It's all your mind is capable of
>people who are successful with their money having more to invest
>illogical
Spotted the retard
The system rewards those who invest in sound businesses by giving them more to invest in other sound businesses. Makes perfect sense to anyone who isn't a 19 year old college aged socialist.
>>80309143
>they start chimping out.
Chimping out is what niggers do when police kills a nigger.
What would happen if people starved while seing the rich living so well and amassing each time more wealth is a wholly different level. But a autist couldn't comprehend this.
Why are the 80% so greedy? Most of them perfectly happy lives, but they still want more and want to take it from wealthier people.
>>80309336
Really, when did I say government regulation was the answer? Where did I say that?
ALSO, I never said it wasn't natural. I was making the argument that whether somthing is natural or not is irrelevant in this circumstance.
It's natural for men to rape and kill other "tribes" constantly.
>>80309570
>Makes perfect sense to anyone who isn't a 19 year old college aged socialist.
And everyone with more then 17 years old know that the wrld does not work like you pointed out
>>80298204
>defend
It doesn't need to be defended, you don't have a right to have the same amount of money as everyone else. life isn't fair, some get born into starving shitholes, some get born into billionaire families. Deal with what you are handed and make the best of the life you have. YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN YOUR INALIENABLE RIGHTS, AND HAVING MONEY ISN'T ONE OF THEM
>>80298204
What's wrong with having a lot of money?
>>80309829
>YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED
>no one is entitled to anything
>b b but except the people I say
>>80309829
>you don't have a right to have the same amount of money as everyone else.
And who is advocating that?
>YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN YOUR INALIENABLE RIGHTS, AND HAVING MONEY ISN'T ONE OF THEM
>Yes good goy, receive your crumbs and be satisfied with them.
>>80310014
>I am entitled to wealth because u r jew if u say otherwise
>>80298204
How well off are long term unemployed people in the US compared to people in third world countries working over 60 hours/week in sweatshops in third world countries?
>>80310152
>Rich are entitled to wealth becasue they are sons of other rich people
>>80310247
>How well off are long term unemployed people in the US compared to people in third world
Not an argument. Want to compare blades of grass to a giant tree next?
>>80310269
>poor are entitled to other peoples wealth because of my feelings
>>80310247
>needs to compare themselves to third world countries to appear good
How low has america fallen...
>>80310247
Also we are not talking about the poor so why do you try and divert the conversation
>>80310269
>born into a wealthy family should have no right to the family wealth
How fucking stupid are you? If I make it big and leave my fortune to my kids, it is MY fortune to leave to WHOEVER I WANT
>>80310461
Poor are entitled to have the same starting point as rich people.
>>80310584
lol no
>>80309829
Found the rich white guy's 15 year old son
>>80310578
>momentarily embarrassed future billionaire
>>80310699
>I have not logical argument so I'll just discount you as (INSERT GROUP YOU WISH TO RIDICULE HERE)
top kek
you lose
Rich people have the right to do what they wish with their money, and you don't have to be rich to know that. I'm probably poorer than you, but I work hard and won't be poor forever.
>>80298204
Because I'm rich and fuck you.
>>80309755
It's rather bad form to suggest that the status quo should be usurped when you can't even imagine a better one. Considering that wealth inequality is a natural thing, only government intervention could curb it. This much is obvious. Hence that it is also quite relevant as to whether wealth inequality is natural or unnatural: It dictates whether it is government that would stop it. Common sense. You propped up an argument and then tried to play dumb in order to get out of liability.
The only people who give a shit are poor and they could cast themselves of a bridge tomorrow and nobody would miss them
>>80310916
>I'm probably poorer than you, but I work hard and won't be poor forever.
Kek
Found the brainswashed jew slave
>>80310461
>50% of the population doesnt pay federal taxes.
>Of the people that do pay federal taxes, the bottom 50% collectively pay 30 billion dollars in taxes every year.
>Over 1 trillion dollars in tax dollars is used every year in free programs for low income household's
waah waah the rich arent pay in their fair share
This thread got spooky fast
>>80311098
>you're wrong because jew JEW JEW JEW JEW
Keep digging, your hole is already pretty deep you dumb spic
>>80298204
>Implying my household isn't in the top 10%
Poor days need not apply
>>80311209
Keep working on McDonalds and you'll get there someday, kid
>>80311488
>mfw this faggot is literally completely out of arguments so now he's just trying to throw handfuls of insults hoping one will stick
>mfw edgy socialist teenagers think they're entitled to other people's money because it isn't fair and it hurts their feelings
>>80310584
> entitled
And where does this entitlement come from? Why should a woman with bo education who has four children with an absent father, who doesnt pay child support, deserve to have the same quality of life as a woman who finished high school, went to college, got a degree, got a career, got married, and decided to have only one child?
>>80298204
oy vey, why are you so anti-semitic? 43% of the 1% are jewish, therefore you are discriminating and inciting religious hatred, goyim
>>80299681
>>80311624
Did I trigger you? Awww poor baby, keep workind, and you'll be rich, nobody will dare touch you then!
Just a hint: Rich people don't work on "normal" jobs
>>80298204
>Dist. 92% chose as ideal
That's communism
>>80298204
"Free Market Capitalism" was created by jews, National Socialism is the only way.
>>80311979
>5000 people sample
>>80298204
god damn i fucking love capitalism
>>80298204
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuqemytQ5QA
canada defend yourself
>>80298204
Only about 20% of the top 1% stay there
Same can be said for the bottom 30%
Wealth is not distributed
It's earned
>>80298204
>survey
>Not IRS data or some other shit
How retarded can you be?
>>80310584
No they aren't.
No one is born equal, not even a man to himself on different days of the week.
You sound like one of those fucks who think people should have a good and comfy standard of living off minimum wage.
>>80298204
yall are a bunch of whining poorfags.
second compare the wealth of the bottom 40% of the US to the world and even our nigs and white trash are literal kangs and sheit.
>>80312707
can you read?
clearly the first 2 are from the survey and the 3rd bar is fact based.
REMINDER:
To be in the top 20% you need $250,000 to your name in assets.
Most people in their 40's have accumulated this much.
>poor people spend their entire paycheck on iPhones and big screen TVs
>complain that they don't have enough wealth
>>80298204
They defend it because they lick anus for a living.
Because it tastes good to them.
Because /pol/ LIKES THE TASTE OF SHIT.
>>80314817
I don't see how this could be true... $250000 is so little just about anybody could achieve it...
>>80314817
I think that's where the tension stems from. Millennials get butthurt about their boomer parents being so well off while they're just scraping by. They seem to forget that their parents had their whole lives to accumulate that wealth. It's not like they were living in big houses, driving new cars, etc. when they were in their 20s.
>>80314927
but goyim letting poor people have more money allows them to spend it on stuff and is good for the economy. come on goyim lets try communism again this time, this time it'd work.
>>80312001
off of my board commie, goodbye
>>80315105
Their boomer parents had massively better employment opportunities and lack of crippling college debt. The economy was just in better shape back then because it hadn't been fucked by Reaganomics yet.
>>80315164
> Talking about Communism.
> Talking about money spent on stuff.
Choose one.
>>80315349
>B-But you have this fancy phone!!!!
>>80298204
Did you notice how many Jews are in that top 20%?
>>80298204
Why is the proposed solution always communism and not nationalizing the bank?
>>80315712
Im op and I've never once said that this whole thread
>>80315712
Because the Holocaust
>>80315712
Who talked about communism?
Do you even know what communism is? (I already know the answer to this)
>>80315470
The soviet union had money. It kept people from using more than their fair share.
You think money didn't exist at all there?
>>80300225
Liberals defend the rich and the elite. They are the ones who benefit from globalization. People here don't tend to have childish plans for a perfect peaceful world or to get massively rich quick. We just want to live our fucking lives in peace without having to become slaves to the welfare caste.
>>80298204
What do you do that personally affects the population?
Do you have any idea what YOUR personal efforts do in relation to other people?
It is COMPLETELY LOGICAL.
money = willingness and ability
do you have abilities others do not, or profit from the unwillingness of others?
Remember that money does not accumulate from its existence. It accumulates from other people GIVING IT to you.
Sure you work a job. But would someone pay you directly for anything you did if you weren't being told what to do?
>>80301359
>Even the le "red pilled" faggots LOVE being slaves
=~s/Even/Especially/
For fuck's sake, you're talking about Trumpists and Hitler fans. They want nothing more than a strong master to take them in hand and tell them what to think. They are untermenschen and they know it.
>>80315935
Oh, we were talking about the Soviet Union? Sorry, because you said Communism I thought we were talking about Communism.
>>80316166
I'd call myself a liberal but I'd also be one of the first to call for the uber wealthy to get French Revolution'd.
>>80305816
Why was there economic growth in the 1960s, then?
>>80299111
>>80299884
>>80299990
>>80306474
If you agree with the 92% of Americans who thought the middle distribution is ideal, you have no idea how mathematics works and you should go kill yourself.
>>80316416
Any form of communism that has ever been tried has ended up failing in a society of state control. There has not been a single communist system out there that has not ended up this way.
If you go communist you get an authoritarian state . Don't give me this no true Scotsman bullshit, we all know how communism ends up in practice.
>>80312495
Wew it took more than 100 posts to find the only reasonable post in this whole thread. /pol/ is fucking losing it.
>>80298204
who /top1%/ here?
fucking poor fags bitching about the wealth distribution, most of you are just lazy, or shit skins
>>80305163
Nice goalpost move, you must be new as fuck to think that would work. Just deal with your retardation being called out like a man, dumb fuck.
>>80306814
i like this picture
>>80316262
wealth inequality isn't the problem. It's the symptom.
When you have people that no jack shit about anything, then they're useless to other people. The problem here is about asset utilization.
Poor people is a symptom of people not being used efficiently.
If some poor ass motherfucker is only pulling in 20k annually, that means that by virtue of simple maths, he is NOT WORTH much more than 20k to anyone else. If he was, then someone should be looking to utilize him more efficiently for their own gain, and woo him with a better opportunity.
See here's the problem. If you could FIX this know nothing sack of shit and get him to pull in 50k annually instead. EVERYONE WINS! If this guy can somehow be worth over double his current income, then that means he is providing more value to the economy as a whole. This means that he is adding value.
The question isn't
"how do we distribute the wealth better?", it's
"how do we make worthless people worth something?"
>>80311171
The overwhelming majority of households pay Federal taxes.
The majority of recipients of Federal gibsmedats have paid or will pay Federal taxes.
Almost all wealthy people in the country make use of government gibsmedats.
The 1% own more than half the wealth in the country. What percentage of the tax burden is fair for them to pay? What percentage do they pay?
>>80316696
You're strawmanning me pretty hard there. I don't actually disagree, Communism is pretty awful and will always fail unless Humanity has a massive period of global enlightenment (at which point we'll have a better system anyway.) The point is that you said
>but goyim letting poor people have more money allows them to spend it on stuff and is good for the economy. come on goyim lets try communism again this time, this time it'd work.
Then I said
>Communism, money spent on stuff: Choose one.
Then you immediately jumped to the Soviet Union.
Sure, they're the most famous example of Communism, but they aren't equatable, just like the US isn't equatable with Capitalism.
>>80317785
but then which system of communism has not involved money?
Money is involved purely as a way to keep people from using more than their fair share. For example the state pays everyone I don't know 3500$. And then said people use that on food and the like. I mean they can't just walk into a store and say I want this and walk away with it.
If not all tried versions of communism has involved money, then sure as fuck most have.
>>80317328
>"how do we make worthless people worth something?"
Never thought it about that way, but it's essentially right.
>>80318290
>but then which system of communism has not involved money?
None, because communism as never been tried.
>Money is involved purely as a way to keep people from using more than their fair share.
Nope, it's used to facilitate trasfers, you fucking retard
I really don't have anything to add or subscribe to the theories of this board but I found this unicode character and wanted to see if it worked
>>80319492
>None, because communism as never been tried.
le never been tried meme.
>Nope, it's used to facilitate trasfers, you fucking retard
This is to stupid for me to even bother explaining to you. You've probably been told hundreds of times. stay delusional.
testing again
>>80317389
>The overwhelming majority of households pay Federal taxes.
Not true. Less than half pay any federal income tax.
>The majority of recipients of Federal gibsmedats have paid or will pay Federal taxes.
I doubt it. My guess is most never earn enough in a single year to have to pay income tax.
>Almost all wealthy people in the country make use of government gibsmedats.
Not sure what you mean by this... Tax breaks? I'm wealthy, but I made use of Bush's $1000 per chil tax credit for middle income families. I've never taken a handout from the government.
>The 1% own more than half the wealth in the country. What percentage of the tax burden is fair for them to pay?
It depends on their income for the year in question. Unless you are talking about confiscating wealth based on net worth.
>What percentage do they pay?
Depends on income. But the top 1% of earners pay about half of all taxes.
>>80298204
Because 1 Billionare has the same amount of money as millions of the poorest Americans. Its all about how humans see proportions. That "ideal " distribution is pure bullshit because of how equal the sizes are, they are imagining some kind of magical ladder. That is bullshit, and is completely in coherent with how jobs work. Retard.
The "what most Americans think is ideal" distribution is very close to everyone has the same amount.
It's just not having any grasp of math, econ, society, etc.
There's literally nothing wrong with making a shitload of money.
>tfw there will never be communal ownership of the means of production
>tfw Socialism will never prevail
>tfw Capitalism has been an unmitigated success in raising the lot of the many
>tfw you live a comfy upper middle class life with little stress or discomfort
>tfw you get to enjoy seeing the self-avowed socialists, who live off the triumphs of capitalism in some of the most prosperous nations, insist on the validity of the labour theory of value and muh socially necessary labour time knowing that their ideals will never be taken seriously
>>80319975
>le never been tried meme.
But it's not a meme. Communism as never been tried in the same way as a ancap society was never tried. Its not a very difficult concept to put in your thick head
>This is to stupid for me to even bother explaining to you. You've probably been told hundreds of times. stay delusional.
not an argument
>>80321845
Let's see what automation will bring
>>80298204
Get more education
Work harder
lrn2invest
Don't ask for handouts
How do libs not understand this?
>>80298204
Wealth isn't distributed, it's earned through work/investments, it's inherited (from people who earned it) and it's won through luck.
>>80322071
Who is it working out for you?
>>80322006
Not socialism.
>>80315105
Yeah they were doing that in their 25s.
>>80322721
let's see. Don't put the carriage in front of the horses (oxen in Portuguese).
>>80321845
>do search for RATM video
>RATM VEVO channel on youtube pops up
>RATM using the protectors of copywrite so they can profit from the capitalist system while creating art that argues against it
>mfw
>>80322925
I can assure you, the threat of impending revolution and subsequent implementation of socialism has been spewed time and time again. It has and will never come to fruition.
>>80298204
Once again, kiddos, numbers, not feelings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ
You can take it all and jack off to how great you are and then year 2, day 1 begins and you ruined it all.
Get a job. Netlifx, eating out all the time, iWhatever, gigabit internet, new cars etc. are not human rights. Live without for awhile. It's healthy.
>>80321891
What will be different that makes this "real" communism, then. Bear in mind that everyone else who tried it thought the same way you did
>>80320225
The tax called 'Federal income tax' isn't the only tax the Federal government levies upon your income. See pic. For a good time try doing your taxes as if you were self-employed and check out how much fatter they suddenly get.
>I doubt it. My guess is most never earn enough in a single year to have to pay income tax.
It's true that many means-tested handouts are not available if you're above dirt poor *in the year you receive them* - however, social mobility is a thing. IIRC less than 20% of TANF recipients stay eligible ten years in a row (I think the number's closer to 10%, but I'm more sure of the 20%). Most wind up getting enough of an income to get off welfare at some point in their lives. And many people who are getting bennies NOW worked and paid federal tax in the past.
Anecdotally, I used to qualify for gov't-subsidized health care on account of being a poor shit. This year I've prepaid tens of thousands of dollars to the IRS already.
>Not sure what you mean by this... Tax breaks?
Nah. Roads, trains, and planes.
>It depends on their income for the year in question. Unless you are talking about confiscating wealth based on net worth.
Doesn't confiscating wealth based on income rather than net worth penalize work?
Now, if you're right that the top 1% of earners pay about half the taxes, that doesn't seem that unfair to me.
>>80323320
Well, academia would either be neutral or supportive of change. A large sect of population too. Media is also socialist biased. Only police and army (?) are solidly in reactionary side.
>has been spewed time and time again.
But everything changes after automation.
>It has and will never come to fruition.
The feudal lords saif the same.
>>80323648
Well, for starters, communism is anarchic.
>Bear in mind that everyone else who tried it thought the same way you did
So i can say Chile is a free market society?
>>80298204
>Majority opinion of the economic ideal is decided by people who don't know dick about making money, and we should listen to them.
Bottom 40% don't work, and the higher 20% is made of a combination of teenagers and the chronic unskilled. Fuck 'em, the teenagers who are worth a shot will grow up and into the next bracket.
>>80324515
>Bottom 40% don't work
Unemployment is 5% in USA
>>80323948
The only academics who are wholly supportive of socialism tend to be those in the humanities, sociology, philosophy, etc. They have little impact on policy making. Academic economists tend to have influence on policy making and they are often against the implementation of socialism as Marxian economics is considered heterodox and not taken seriously beyond economic historians.
The population favours the system that has benefited and raised to lot of the ordinary person over the last 2 centuries. That system is capitalism.
The media is not biased towards socialism, or else socialism would be taken seriously in the West.
Automation will simply destroy old industries and create new ones. Industrial restructuring and workers will adopt new more relevant skills. It has happened in the past as we have shifted from agrarian based economies to manufacturing to service.
>>80311909
Said the European that probably never worked in his live, that never have seen the consequences of his acts, I'm from a poor country, not the most poor, but one that you would like to live in, and the wealth distribution fucked up my country, for 10 year all gone nice and then surprise the money ended, but people don't want to work any more, 20% of the whole nation simply don't work, the retired don't have money for medicine and are waiting for months in public medical facilities, the price of food have grow 150% in the last year, some police forces have became armies to deal with crime and violence, this is what happen when some "nice" politician promise to be nice with the lowest, and you how have payed for this party, the 1%? No, they are richer than before, that small parcel of the population that you could have called "middle class" 10 year ago. That politician how "tries" to redistribute wealth is the fucking 1%, they have manage to destroy the last political opposition (middle class) and put half of the population under their paycheck (social security, unemployed help...), in the end, people get more poor and 1% don't get more rich but more powerfull.
>>80324515
>Bottom 40% don't work,
>us population 318 million
>127 million people don't work
>>80298204
who the fuck cares there is a new episode of the big bang tonight.
>>80324771
Unemployed is someone that don't work, is capable of work and want to work, the bottom 20% will never work unless they need, so social secure should be a bad paying gov. job not free money, in this case, only that how really need would apply for it.
>>80298204
People are not equal. Fucking deal with it.
>>80315105
The cars back then were also made of metal and not fucking plastic.
>>80327740
>Big Bang theory on tonight
Good goy
>>80327442
"don't work" includes:
wives at home
no regular jobs
part time/season jobs
students at collage
underployed
>this is possible
>>80303309
>But if I give him $5000 under current rules, he wouldn't pay anything. How is that fair?
Why should he pay anything, you already paid the income tax on the money yourself, and gave him the remaining money ($5000)
>>80317328
>"how do we make worthless people worth something?"
Of course know nothings are worthless, we've been importing them en masse for decades specifically to that achieve that goal.
The macro economics would like to see him be worth something but no business is willing to be the one to eat the cost of making him into something much less paying him.
This shit is a secondary priority.
I want to build the fucking wall first and everything else comes afterwards.
The wall is most important
>>80324771
To be counted a unemployed in the U.S. you have to actually be looking for work. Coons living on aren't counted since they are not actually looking for work. Real unemployment rate is about 25%
>>80327442
over 94 million not in the workforce.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/economy-adds-jobs-june
>>80328672
Social security could be replaced with a shit job, like build roads or clean the streets, get a proper live will work as a incentive, the get better and to don't use social security.
>>80328603
>Why should he pay anything,
If he bought $5000 worth of crap from me I'd have to pay income tax on it even though he already paid income tax on it.
That said, $5000 is under the annual gift tax exemption iirc, and I don't really have a problem with that. It's the inheritance of vast piles of dynastic wealth that perturbs society harmfully, not the small stuff.
>>80328284
Eh people under the age of 18 alone would be ~26% of the population. That would leave 13% with still others to be subtracted from it. I suppose it's possible.
Then again I noticed that fucked up anyways. The original image is using households not individuals so that dramatically changes the numbers. It estimates that there are 115 million households in the US, split into 5 groups.
Although now >>80324515 is saying 46 million households don't work which is back to being something to laugh at.
>>80329739
The real problem is that no one never take money from the 1%, the money always is taken from working middle class, aka. useful people, to the bottom.
>>80298204
I dunno how someone on the right of that spectrum supports it (but they do, lol), but I support it out of self interest. My family is top 1%ers. Hell, that's a conservative figure, we're at least top 0.1%, possibly 0.01%. Totally unrelated to what they do or the trust fund, just money from my job, I'm a top 1%. I enjoy the system as it is. Whether you say it is unfair or not will never change it. Ideologically, I have no problem with the system as it is, but I do think that social mobility is important (the poor can make their way to being wealthy easier with hard work).
>>80329280
That doesn't solve the problem that we have pulled the rug out from under our working poor by importing the 3rd world working poor for decades.
It would also result in shitty roads according to economic rhetoric.
Besides I'm tired of road crews, it's about time we build a mega machine that can tear up and put down a road in a single pass. I mean we can build this monster but we can't build a road building machine?
>>80329280
Shit jobs aren't a good replacement for social security - in the US, most SS recipients are too old to operate a grader or whatever, and the disability ones generally don't have the capability to do useful hard work - if they did, they wouldn't have qualified in the first place.
That said, I do like the notion of the government providing a lot of low-end jobs. If you're gonna try to stimulate the economy, you can do worse than fixing all our potholes as a by-product.
>>80324771
While I agree with you that it is impossible that the bottom 40% don't work, the U3 figure (the figure often cited as unemployment) does have a couple flaws. It only covers people "in the labor force" meaning that "discouraged" workers who are no longer looking for work are not included in this figure. You'd want to look at U4 (of U5, I can never remember) for that (these figures come out on the first Friday of every month as a part of the "employment situation"). You can also see underemployed workers with the U6 (like someone with a BS that works at McDonalds).
>>80324771
>>80327442
>>80329879
>Gubment calculators.
They're really selective and contradictory. Demand specific demographic breakdown of every statistic you see, cucks.
>>80330345
Your thoughts on the influence of huge wealth imbalance on the political system? I don't necessarily just mean buying off politicians but also the fact that say all the media companies are owned by a handful of jews?
>>80298204
Wealth is created, not stolen.
Looks like niggers need to start pulling their own weight.
>>80330708
In my country the word "social security" is only for non retired
>believing wealth is "distributed" from some central source
Wealth "distribution" is meaningless. It just means you're a worthless fuck whos jealous of other people's shit and want it for free
>>80331097
pure finacel operations don't creat any wealth
>>80328284
That's actually a good point, didn't really think about that. This figure is feasible, do you have a source? Also, it wouldn't necessarily be the bottom 40% because many of these people are just dependents on someone else who works (housewives/children on the husband/father). If a guy makes $100k in salary, his unemployed housewife wouldn't be in the bottom 40%, I'd put her on the same level as him because they are that family "block."
Threadly reminder that Nationalist View !CX/pol/EUo used to be called Lefty/pol/ and is not a nationalist but a socialist.
Carry on.
>>80330708
>That said, I do like the notion of the government providing a lot of low-end jobs.
Not even low end jobs necessarily, just maintaining the fucking infrastructure would be nice. But that will never happen, money only ever gets spent on our infrastructure when it's used to build bridges to nowhere and to tear up good concrete roads and replace them with asphalt roads that don't last 2 winters. http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
>>80331303
You could say that this 40% always existed, but they get they wealth form family, charity... today, without this institution, the liberal god-state have to maintain they.
>>80322603
Bretty good breh. I graduate with my MBA in December and already have a nice job lined up in Raleigh
>>80298204
>>80331053
My view is basically "I have a good thing going here, why disrupt it?" I won't say that the US isn't basically an oligarchy (plutarchy), but I do enjoy being on the right side of it. The most important thing to me is not wealth equality, I don't think everyone should make the same amount of money. You know, some people are just smarter, harder working, etc. However, I do think wealth mobility (the ability to actually "pick yourself up by your bootstraps") is very important in a capitalist economy (even though we are mixed because we have some economic controls).
>>80330567
Didn't that monster nudge a bunch of foundations and get stuck under Seattle for a few months? MY monster went to another world!
>>80330012
>The real problem is that no one never take money from the 1%, the money always is taken from working middle class, aka. useful people, to the bottom.
'cause we keep electing 1%er politicians who favour short-term 1%er interests. (I say short-term because the 'blow up the budget and use it as an excuse to slash services' strategy destabilizes shit, and people who own half the country have a fuck of a lot more to lose than my upper middle class ass does)
I'm gonna have to take issue with your characterization of the bottom as useless, though. In addition to the social mobility I've already noted, drawfags are often on the bottom.
Economic inequality exists because people are biologically unequal.
>>80331596
The XXI infrastructure is exactly the same of the mid XX century, come on, is there new things to be build, more barrages for free and cheap energy, well painted streets, maybe provide cheaper services (food) to public buildings like prison and schools
>>80331623
True, but I wouldn't say that all of these people wouldn't work if they were on their own. For kids/or some legit welfare leeches, that's true, but some people (like some housewives) would probably work if they were on their own.
>>80300371
Its not even pareto if you count worldwide.
Like 1% own more than 50% of the wealth
>>80308919
Yea no.
They own the money
>>80331850
To become a politic you have to have 1% money to your campaign, media (1%) and other politicians support, is a dead end in federal level, maybe there is a solution in municipal.
>>80331753
Perhaps you should save that image for communism threads?
>>80331823
>I don't think everyone should make the same amount of money.
If you look at the images, the people polled don't want that either. Since you keep talking about wealth mobility I'll put it this way. People want to the climb to being well off to be like climbing Everest instead of like climbing to Saturn... without a space suit.
>>80331955
Yea in sure all those poor 3rd world shitskins are biologically inferior
Being honest, the 0,1% are a chaste, like nobility in the middle ages, they live from the money they already have and even a retard could put someone (1%) to take care of the money.
The problem here is that dumb ass(bottom) keep at 0,1%.
>>80331753
>money doesnt give you more chances
Pls
>>80331850
>Didn't that monster nudge a bunch of foundations and get stuck under Seattle for a few months?
I wasn't aware they were doing a tunnel in Seattle. The only major projects I know about are in Europe.
>>80332691
> National wealth is different from personal wealth
each nation have proper characteristics, like culture, natural resources, population...
even with the same biological poll they wealth would still diferent
>>80333023
Literally not even relevant.
Like japan has no resources but is 3rd largest gdp
>>80333195
Yes, but north and south Korea used to have the same genetic poll
>born into shitty family filled with problems
>god of the dice decided my fate was bound to be shit
>decided I had enough
>quit school at 16 and start working early to build up credit rating
>use it to start my own business
>first couple years are rocky as fuck and I'm pretty much living in on edge, can barely afford food
>finally push business into profit
>24 now and have a nice business going with 100k in the bank (amazing considering my background)
>if I keep going like this, I'll be pretty damn rich, and I'd be able to retire sooner than most people, even other rich people if I really wanted to
>socialists want me to give over a large portion of my wealth just because they're too lazy to go to work themselves, despite me coming from an arguably worse background
Nah, fuck you, OP.
>>80332391
I didn't say it wasn't popular, I just gave you my opinion.
You is trying to sell the same thing that destroyed my country, like the commies use to do, so fuck how "nice" or "just" you are, comies used to be very "nice", "just" and "well intent" go to hell with this redistribution shit.
>>80298204
>>80298204
>implying we defend this at all
>>80298204
Because it doesn't fucking matter. You want some of that money, go earn it.
>>80298204
people are stupid
distribution disparities rise and fall with the wind
