Is there anything as much as a bore as watching a leaf defend Trickle Down economics
This is the bottom line: >In all western countries the wealth gap has increased >CEOs are being payed exorbitant salaries they don't DESERVE yet alone need >Unregulated capitalism in a Globalist economy has taken industrial power away from western countries and given it to our competitors
Capitalism today works against YOU, when will you understand this?
Face it, ever since the 80s Capitalism has taken a turn for the worse, it no longer serves the interest of the people, WHICH MEANS YOU, we are about to learn that while Human Nature works better then communism, primitive thought also leads us to destruction, there is no black and white when it comes to Capitalism vs Communism.
An extraordinary amount of wealth concentration doesn't negate the fact planned economies inherently lead to poverty and famine due to incomptence in trying to keep up with market economics.
The issue with Capitalism is the culture along with it that has bred mass consumerism, the decline of the Calvinist ideal has essentially negated the source of capitalism and thus has produced the economic and social means of constant consumption.
Aiden Smith
So what do you propose? That each country have a sort of nationalistic socialism?
Noah Diaz
>That each country have a sort of nationalistic socialism?
national socialism isn't a Nationalistic form of Socialism.
Nathan Reyes
The well being of the ordinary person is the main thing that has been improved with the rise of Capital in North America...literally homeless people have cell phones.
where do you think the productivity in NA would be if we had the same capital as we did 100 years ago?
1/10 for making me reply.
Cooper Smith
Top kek a leaf raped you in an other thread so you make a thread of your own to bitch more?
That said, Sup Forums is a (special 88 ingredient blend) socialist board, swines get out.
Landon Russell
Tell me why the wealth gap matters at all.
How does it affect you?
The rich get richer and the poor get richer too.
As long as everyone is on an upward trajectory, what difference does it make?
Michael Clark
>literally homeless people have cell phones
You are treating cellphones as if they are a luxury, nowadays mobile phones are a must if you want to keep down a job, don't give me that bs
>where do you think the productivity in NA would be if we had the same capital as we did 100 years ago?
stupid comparison
Isaac Cox
>The rich get richer and the poor get richer too.
My fucking god...
>As long as everyone is on an upward trajectory, what difference does it make?
I hope you understand the stupidity of that thinking, i hope to god you do
Michael Cox
>Let me ignore facts and continue to insult you
At some point, you have to stop.
Gavin Perry
Wealth gaps are irrelevant provided the lowest bracket isn't in stagnation, in regards to the United States, the economy relies solely on top down investment.
Levi Rivera
>CEOs are being payed exorbitant salaries they don't DESERVE yet alone need I don't get this argument. People always assume that CEO's are paying themselves, and they are greedy and pay themselves more than they deserve. This couldn't be further from the truth. A CEO is payed by the stockholders. Naturally the stockholders want to pay the CEO as little as possible to increase retained earnings/dividends. However CEO's have a lot of market power (equivalent to being heavily unionized in an uncorrupted manner), hence they can negotiate higher pay. CEO pay isn't even extravagant. Mylan's CEO, who got a salary increase for raising the price of the epipen, is $20M. Tom Brady had a yearly income of $40M last year from contract and sponsorships. Yes fucking sports stars make as much as CEOs, when they deserve it far less than CEOs.
Jack Martinez
low quality aussie bants. evacuate thread.
Oliver Butler
I shouldn't have to explain but being that you faggots are already trying to refute me for not
You're right, the poor person's wealth will increase too, but this is the fucking problem, for every increment of wealth his increases, the wealth of the rich man will increase ten fold, it's just brainless.
Daniel Hill
>lowest bracket isn't in stagnation
hmmm, sort of is actually
Leo Watson
> for every increment of wealth his increases, the wealth of the rich man will increase ten fold, it's just brainless.
This is not inherently bad, you're making the argument you would rather have no food than someone else get more than you.
Cooper Wood
>hmmm, sort of is actually
I know for a fact in Australia it isn't.
Jack Wright
homeless people today live better and longer than kings did 700 years ago
>"stupid comparison"
nice rebuttal faggot.
Thomas Green
Half of absolute poverty has been eliminated in the past 20 years
Bentley Anderson
>live better and longer than kings did 700 years ago
So what? Unless you're worried about "fairness," as long as people's quality of life is increasing across the board, we should keep that up.
The poor 50 years ago is a lot different from the poor now. The poor in capitalist countries are far better off than others.
Not every new advancement that comes along that everyone starts using becomes a "human right."
William Hughes
>Muh ceo pay >Even if it was divided among all workers it would amount to a dollar at most in hourly wage
>Muh wealth gap when capital productivity has increased while labor productivity is stagnant
>Muh regulations when all they do is use armed theft to take other people's property.
Communists will be forcibly removed.
Noah Martin
food is much more abundant, clothes are much more abundant, the prospect of getting work that isn't slavery is much more abundant, theres a welfare state established, i mean the list goes on and on and on... Without the miracle of consumer capitalism, we would all die in our own shit at 43 with rotten teeth...kinda like they did 700 years ago.
Jacob Richardson
the wealth gap has only grown due to central banks and inept fiscal policy. There is no such thing as trickle down economics, and no economist worth his salt uses that term. Tax cuts for the rich can help free up money for savings (which is integral for a healthy economy) and company tax cuts help to stimulate investment by reducing the cost of capital, its straight forward. The only point of difference for economists is arguing whether these are worth it.
Josiah Martin
>you would rather have no food than someone else get more than you
But what if it isn't enough food?
There are places in the country right now that are already in recession
in third world countries?
fuck just stop with this relativistic shit
>as long as people's quality of life is increasing across the board, we should keep that up >You are slightly less poor then your grandfather was so stop complaining *eats whole turky
Bentley Butler
OP, read this shit
Levi Ramirez
>we would all die in our own shit at 43 with rotten teeth...kinda like they did 700 years ago.
Thats not really the case, life expectancy back then is measured lower due to large infant mortality rates; Kings lived well into their 50s and 60s in relative luxury.
Kevin Walker
so,you've taken rational arguments and provided no rebuttal whatsoever...
what do YOU think we should do then?
Jaxson Allen
>bitching about getting "doubleteamed" are you 12?
Asher Scott
well, uh...thanks for proving my point, I guess.
Nicholas Collins
>thanks for proving my point, I guess.
I wasn't contesting the premise, but the assertion the poverty strinken man in the modern day lives better than a King 700 years ago isn't accurate.
Mason Hall
You're poor, and you're able to spend your life shitposting on Sup Forums about capitalism.
That has to be worth something.
Caleb Stewart
>You're poor, and you're able to spend your life shitposting on Sup Forums about capitalism. That has to be worth something.
>Basseless ad hominem >i'm the one shitposting
Brody Bell
>But what if it isn't enough food? Food is a shitty example, it's not like CEOs are stockpiling 20 million dollars worth of food and refusing to share it. Wealth can be technically created regardless of how much there is
Nolan Diaz
swap be and technically
Tyler James
>, it's not like CEOs are stockpiling 20 million dollars worth of food and refusing to share it
that's exactly what the problem is, the problem is not them sharing it, but how they got the food in the first place, with an unnecessarily big salary
Brayden Perry
>Wealth gap
If anyone has ever thought that the richest people have millions or even billions of dollars just lying around in cash and use it solely so they can jack off in pools of gold, they should off themselves immediately.
For anyone who doesn't get it, THE WEALTH GAP IS CAUSED BECAUSE THE WEALTHY OWN MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF PRODUCTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE. OIL TYCOONS AREN'T WEALTHIER BECAUSE THEY HAVE MONEY LAYING AROUND, THEY OWN DRILLS, TANKERS, OIL REFINERIES, AND OTHER PRODUCTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE WEALTHY HAVING WEALTH IS THE CULMINATION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PRODUCTIVE CAPITAL OF SOCIETIES OVER DECADES, AND IS AS MUCH A TOOL OF SOCIAL GOOD AS IT IS A CAPITAL BENEFIT TO THE PERSON WHO OWNS IT. INDIVIDUAL LABOURERS COULD NEVER HOPE TO REACH THE PRODUCTIVE CAPACITIES OF FACTORIES AND WORKSHOPS, AND THE ONLY SYSTEM THAT HAS EVER SUSTAINABLY PRODUCED EVER INCREASING NUMBERS OF AND QUALITY IN THESE PRODUCTIVE INDUSTRIES IS THE CAPITALIST SYSTEM. MORALITY IN AN ECONOMY AND 'FAIRNESS' DON'T MEAN SHIT WHEN YOUR SOCIETY CAN BARELY EXIST THROUGH SUBSISTENCE FARMING AND SELF-EMPLOYED TRADE WORKERS ALONE.
Jack Hughes
But you asked "what if there isn't enough money" while using food as an analogy, so clearly, they must be having too much money compared to the rest of the population, according to your logic
