|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 | ||||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-10-27 15:32, BillMcCloskey wrote: It means I found your statement about Gates and Buffett ("perhaps they know something you don't") silly.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-10-27 23:20, balducci wrote: That's an interesting "presumably." I would expect that many things that correlate positive with socioeconomic success are genetic and/or cultural or pertain to upbringing. Even in a society devoid of inherited wealth, I would expect, other things being equal, children of parents of parents who are more well off to be more financially successful than children of parents who are less well off. I am reminded of an anecdote in one of Larry Elder's books, about going to a library in an economically depressed part of Los Angeles, at the urging of his friend, and finding a group of children doing skateboard tricks in the parking lot for hours, then going inside the library, whether another there was another group of children studying for hours. If and when the second group gets an education, works hard, stays out of trouble, and earns its way outside of its cohort, and the first group doesn't, will we say that the first group lacked "mobility" or "opportunity"? If another society deems it preferable to take more money from the well off and give it to the first group, even if they don't take advantage of the opportunities they're presented, will we say that their increased finances represents "mobility" that was afforded by the society?
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
balducci Loyal user Canada 227 Posts |
I'm cutting and pasting a few paragraphs from an article at this link:
http://www.frumforum.com/why-the-rich-get-richer "It is no secret to practitioners that in systems of capital finance, opportunity and the wealth that comes with it have a natural propensity over time to clump, sometimes without regard to extraordinary human talent or ability. In what is otherwise probably the world’s most efficient system of resource allocation, this propensity of capital finance is an historically acknowledged systemic flaw." "In a system of capital finance (when we speak of the capitalist system, we are speaking exclusively of a system of finance, though the word “capitalism” as a rival of “communism” has assumed ideological content as well), it takes money to make money. Those who have money have a systemic advantage in the acquisition of proven productive resources over those who do not, an advantage which compounds." "So it is no secret that it takes money to make money and those who already have it really are better positioned to get more of it than those who do not when it comes to many, perhaps most, proven business opportunities. Money in hand, the talent can be bought, unless the talent (Steve Jobs? Bill Gates?) is of truly unique genius, knows it, and can refuse to be bought. In a system of capital finance, only if talent is truly unique and of decisive importance in the success or failure of a venture, might talent have an advantage over money." "So it is in this context that the present crisis must be understood. With the top one percent of the population now owning more wealth than the bottom 90%, the acceleration of wealth to the top could easily intensify, not mitigate. Some might argue that the more natural state of mankind, unchecked by taxation, is not equality, but concentration, in which just a few families ultimately are able eventually to assume command of all wealth. So it was in the Gilded Age, when a few families came to control whole industries. Why has this concentration of wealth occurred only recently in the U.S.? It’s hard not to suspect that the reduction of the estate, income, dividend and capital gains tax rates on the upper reaches of wealth, to the lowest level since those rates were raised at the outset of World War II, has had some influence."
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-10-27 15:17, BillMcCloskey wrote: Your experience is quite skewed, and shows in your bias and hatred for wealthy people.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-10-27 16:24, balducci wrote: Why is it only conservative partisanship bothers you?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
balducci Loyal user Canada 227 Posts |
That may be how you see it, but that's not how it is.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Yea right. Funny how it is only conservative causes that get you posting contrary.
I am sure it is me and you support and agree with lots of conservative ideas. As usual it is me not understanding that when you are bashing that is support.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
balducci Loyal user Canada 227 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-10-28 00:09, LobowolfXXX wrote: I'm not sure I follow what you are saying. The information I posted indicated that the U.S. is a less mobile society than many other nations. This seems hard to dispute, given the evidence. All things being equal, yes, I suspect (as you said) children of parents of parents who are more well off would be more financially successful than children of parents who are less well off. (Wasn't that sort of the same point that BillMcCloskey's made in one of his posts?) That's probably true in all nations. But, so what? The point I was demonstrating was that the evidence shows those WITHOUT the connections and family wealth have a much harder time advancing in the U.S. than their counterparts in most other O.E.C.D. nations. Why could that be, except for those other societies placing a higher value and better rewarding merit (e.g., skills, education, work ethic, etc.)? Quote:
On 2011-10-28 00:09, LobowolfXXX wrote: Nice anecdote. And that's an interesting "if and when". But was there a follow-up, and do we know which group of kids actually did better? Maybe it was the first group, that was willing to put in hours of practice to learn new physical skills, that ended up doing well. That developed the work ethic and networking skills to create new businesses? Maybe the next Tony Hawk was among them? I mean, who knows. I know of some book smart university graduates who are under or unemployed. But my friends in the trades always seem to have a steady work, and I know some university drop outs who have done well as entrepreneurs and franchise owners.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
|
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Yes, the US puts such a high priority on libraries that library hours are one of the first things to be cut when budget time rolls around each year.
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-10-29 16:31, balducci wrote: The evidence doesn't show that, actually.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
Woland Special user 680 Posts |
Back on the topic of the similarities and differences in the Tea Party and OWS phenomena, law professor Glenn Reynolds offers the following:
Quote:
Occupy Wall Street and the movement's brethren in other cities ranging from Chicago, to Baltimore, to Oakland, to London -- has been getting all the press lately. The rest of his column is worth reading, too. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Tea Party co-founder expresses support for Occupy Wall Street (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |