this is a tower of inequality...
>dude the richest 1% own 99% of the wealth!
>t. michael moore and occupiers
>DUDE THE RICHES 1% OWN HALF OF THE WEALTH MAN!
>t. Bernie sanders
>DUDE HOLY FUCK HOW AWFUL, THE 1% OWN 16% OF THE WEALTH, WE'RE ALL EATING SHIT WE FIND ON THE PAVEMENT TO SURVIVE BECAUSE OF THAT 16%
>t. this faggots comic
Yeah, they're fucking bums and retards trying to huddle themselves next to opportunities they aren't qualified to achieve.
What's the make up of the bottom 50% doctors, lawyers, engineers?
Who are they? What are they?
why is the bottom floor raving? i thought they were poor.. bet they're on drugs too.
>According to the Global Rich List, a website that brings awareness to worldwide income disparities, an income of $32,400 a year will allow you to make the cut.
>So if you’re an accountant, a registered nurse or even an elementary school teacher, congratulations. The average wage for any of these careers falls well within the top one percent worldwide.
i'm kiwi this just made me sad.
but we do have an unemployment benefit which is enough to get you by.
The real injustice in the world are families living and working in sweatshops in asia, just so the west can afford cheap goods.
How the fuck do they get there in 3 hours together if those asshats were going to take 6 hours?
Fuck you, I got there in 1 hour and I'm moving to another country that won't force me to be held back.
I'm other words, if you cripple the rich, they'll fuck off to another country.
That's a nice hoodie you have there...
Really rustles my jimmies how the vast majority of people who complain about the wealth gap don't even comprehend what causes it. They just blame capitalism.
"I could use a commonly known English word for a comic I plan to upload on the internet, but nah, instead I think I'll use a word specific to a small demographic of a small demographic of English speakers... Then add an asterisk anyway."
Already triggered. What a fucking retard.
It's not even a percentage anymore the RICHEST 20 people own more wealth then HALF of the UNITED STATES. Yes not 20% or 1% just 20 people out of 300,000,000 people.
>conservitards will defend this.
>if you cripple the rich, they'll fuck off to another country.
You just don't get it past the "me" meme, do you?
The rich aren't rich because they work a thousand times harder than a poor person, or invented something that can do the work of a thousand people.
They are rich because they have their hands in the poor peoples pockets for "that little bit extra" the poor can't really afford to hand over.
They are rich because they have fewer scruples. They are rich because they have no standards of societal membership, other than the "me" meme.
So they'll move to another country, will they? Good. We want them to fuck off. You seriously think your economy will collapse because the people sitting on all the grease have left? What is it, exactly, that you think these people are contributing (it sure as hell ain't taxes).
Lets see if the denizens of their new chosen holiday resort will put up with their leeching as much as you obviously do.
The loan shit is fucking bullshit, and everyone knows it.
My friend got a completely free ride through college because the government paid for it all with the bonuses he got from his parents making shit-teir cash. If he decided to go to a college that costed a bit more, the government would have given him a loan with no issue.
There's a reason we're not all being paid $4 an hour like people were in the 1990s. Inflation causes shit to become more expensive, so you have to adjust minimum wage to the correct amount. If someone is working 40 hours a week at minimum wage, they should be able to support themselves and still have some spending money left to feed the economy. That isn't the case right now in some areas because of this inflation.
You're right that raising the minimum wage any more than we need to will cause the price of goods to raise, but the price of goods raise whether or not minimum wage goes up.
>If I produce 10x the value that you can, why should you be as wealthy as me?
Of course, if the justification is that you are more productive than me, I will claim that this applies to your offspring as well. Can I assume you will be donating your entire deathbed wealth to worthy charitable causes? No?
So now you see that the problem isn't getting paid more for what you do, it's the accumulation of a financial bludgeon, over generations, by those who are undeserving.
As this guy points out, the problem is built into the system>>59938254. Unless the created money the central banks pump out includes the money to pay the "interest" on this confetti-loan, devious people will always be able to screw the little guy.
>Is this the "i have TV therefore I'm not hungry" argument? I'm sure there's a phrase for it, I'll just call it fucking stupid for now.
I don't know what you mean so your comment does nothing for me.
Wages increase in absence of minimum wage hikes. Inflation isn't just cost inflation, (the increase in the cost of goods), inflation is also labor price inflation. Wages naturally increase at the rate of inflation. Inflation is just a nominal change in the value of money over time to adjust for the relative scarcity of goods, wealth and money in an economy.
No one here understands that inflation is essentially meaningless between 1-5% as long as unemployment is low. It's actually a good thing.
Who gives a shit about the world? I don't care if I'm better of than those in Africa and other shit heel countries because just being born in the US makes me better off. It's such a straw man to try to switch it from a country wide to a world wide statistic
>Holy fuck I never even took economics
No shit, I can tell. Who gave banks the right for fractional reserves and at its rate of ~10 percent? Based on what? Fiat declaration and from an unconstitutional organization, the 'federal' reserve.
You poor deluded fool. Your hearts in the right place, but I dont think you quite get how valuable investing, manufacturing, and energy are as businesses. Hate them all you want, (and there is plenty to hate) but they are one of the only reasons we have such a high standard of living in the west, with marvels such as medicine, running water, and heat.
Terribly simple, and we wouldnt have any of these without the super rich. You need some perspective.
Inflation creates a zero sum scenario indirectly, if you had half a brain to consider it. Its not hyperbole like you framed it but you cant deny standards of living have deteriorated by several orders of magnitude in just a couple decades. American exceptionalism is dead and the majority of people are running on fumes. These people are the problem too, the middle class etc, still living the american dream without adjusting accordingly, but that's symptomatic of the problem and no one can fault a dog for returning to the bowl for food after decades of being fed like that.
That's because they don't ask, they take. They are invasive. You don't even know what ants do?
>tfw lowest 50%
Nope, the graph claiming life is so bad is complete bs. My entire family has great health, and we live comfortable in an apartment.
>tfw studying medicine in Ivy league.
Thank you scholarships for the poor.
Haven't seen any replies so far pointing out that wealth inequality statistics (as opposed to income inequality statistics) are a load of shite http://fusion.net/story/44648/why-its-silly-to-add-up-wealth/
I hate this. I really do. This has so many negative impacts it really negates the situation.
The "minimum wage" goes up to the "living wage" and immediately employers cut down on employees as much as they can - and there's so much more reason to now. This leaves even more people unemployed.
Now unskilled jobs that were minimum wage get a huge pay rise - they are now as equally paid as some skilled jobs that were already on a living wage. The people in skilled employment don't get any pay rise.
In this world some people HAVE to be on the bottom. People working on the till in McDonald's shouldn't be paid anywhere near as much as a person in a skilled job - and that's ok. What needs to be worked on is getting money from the very top and distributing it more evenly - not just throwing money into the very bottom where it isn't deserved.
Morale of the story: Conform, don't ever walk at your own pace, don't ever leave the group, don't ever try to go fast, excelling at something is bad, the correct way is to always be mediocre, if you're good at something you must hold yourself back
What a nice story, really. Berniefags are gonna love it
I've takin macroeconomics and we went into fractional reserve lending and money multipliers. Sure, "fractional lending is bad" wasn't said, because it was supposed to teach the frank nature of banks and economic structure and not the implications.
Just pirate an economics book and think for yourself.
The only reason the lower class is so large and growing is because poor people keep having more children than rich people.
>1 poor family, 1 rich family
>give us money u shitlord we poor
>theres 4 people lets divide the wealth ok
>rich family has 2 children
>poor family shits out 10 more poor children
>right theres 16 people now, you need to divide your wealth amongst us 16
>poor family shits out 100 new children, rich family 4
>pls divide equally amongst us all :)
>All this poor people hate and people thinking they are untouchable gods
Now I don't feel so bad for the rich people throughout history that were pulled from their homes by mobs of poor people and killed.
The 1% use the next 14% as a human shield. That 14%, those craving to be recognized, get recognized as "the rich" by the bottom 45% and attacked, fulfilling both the 14%'s dream and the bottom 45%'s desire for social justice. The 1% takes a drive to his summer home in The Hamptons.
Indeed, OWS levied the majority of its complaints at people making <300k, and nobody complained about people making >50m. And not for nothing, but their fury dissipated over the course of a trimester, having achieved zero policy change and discrediting all future attempts. Why would anyone think that group could be employable in the first place? And leaving the bottom 45% is predicated on employment, lest we forget.
The US provides living wages to every single person. Minorities go to jail at a cost of 2000/mo, single moms and people with disabilities get paid about 1200/mo for "completing high school" or "some college." College graduates get food stamps.
History has shown that the poor will always outnumber the rich and their servants. The only way they can hold power is keeping the lower class unarmed so they can't rise up but that only works to a certain extent. But hey this is obviously a bait thread so I'm out.
In the sphere of economics this is stupid, in hiking this is what groups do. We did this in Boy Scouts.
The 3 hour people set the pace, the 6 hours are in the middle and us 1 hours don't let the 6 hours stop. If it is a young kid or something we'll grab some of their shit. But then again a proper crew weighs and distributes gear based on weight (which is typically correlated to age and strength if people are in shape)
The assumption is 6 hour people are lazy or weak. The faster people call them fags and yell to stop slacking, or grab the Dutch oven from the scrawny 12 year old.
that is quite possibly the most retarded info-graphic I have ever seen. Bankers hate inflation. People in debt love inflation. If I can pay off by house with a gallon of milk I'm a happy camper. To think that bankers are causing inflation to steal your wealth you must be some sort of special retard.
>we wouldnt have any of these without the super rich
You have proof? Or just assumptions that fit your personal agenda.
Arguing that it's "the way it is" because it's the way it is is just fucking stupid. If all you say is true, then why has standards of living dropped during a period when there's more bullshit investing going on than ever before?
There is a limited amount of wealth in the world, and in it's liquid form, it's grease for the wheels of industry. The rich are sitting on it, and investing not based on what society needs, but on what generates the quickest and best returns. Meanwhile, what isn't in their interests gets neglected, and the economy seizes up, because unlike 50-50 years ago, we poor folk no longer have the means to collectively fix it, and are too busy working 2 jobs to pay for Chad's fucking swimming pool!
Oh, I know the economy will right itself eventually, but meanwhile people suffer because the nation's vehicle is running on broken parts.
The rich aren't creating our civilization. They are wantonly holding us back from what we could achieve if everyone had a chance to make the best of themselves, instead of having to work all hours just to make ends meet.
Please don't make any more puerile efforts to convince me I'm wrong or deluded. It's clearly your agenda speaking.
>So now you see that the problem isn't getting paid more for what you do, it's the accumulation of a financial bludgeon, over generations, by those who are undeserving.
This hurts the poor and middle class waay more than "muh undeserving rich kids" who very very rarely remain rich from inherence.
The vast majority of the extremely rich are self made.
That and the concept of not being able to pass down what you worked for to give your children a better life is absolutely abhorrent.
Also Pickety has been debunked in this claim so again sit on a spool
>it but you cant deny standards of living have deteriorated by several orders of magnitude in just a couple decades.
This is objectively false
Standard of living has risen from 20-30 years ago.
Something like less than 40% of poor homes had things like a single car microwave even air-conditioning.
Now that number for all is above 80% with shit like the internet on top.
The issue is still destruction of the money supply but the idea that today's poor are worse off is just wrong wrong wrong.
All these comics and all these gifs only to convince people that the government needs to take someone elses' money via threats of jail or death.
You have 10 seconds to explain why a total taxrate of x% of your total income wouldn't work, for literally everyone, no exceptions.
Have little? Pay little? The number of x can be adjusted, but it is the same for everyone.
Also thanks for arguing against your self
>A large academic study released in 2014 found income mobility has not changed appreciably in the last 20 years 
^ LEONHARDT, DAVID (January 23, 2014). "Upward Mobility Has Not Declined, Study Says". New York Times. Retrieved January 23, 2014.
^ Chetty, Raj; Nathaniel Henderson; Patrick Kline; Emmanuel Saez; Nicholas Turner. "NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES, WHERE IS THE LAND OF OPPORTUNITY? THE GEOGRAPHY OF INTERGENERATIONAL MOBILITY IN THE UNITED STATES" (PDF). January 2014. Equality of Opportunity Project. Retrieved 23 January 2014.
If this is true they should live Donald Trump. That lower 50% is going to get a massive tax break and no one will benefit more from the factory and industry coming back to America than them
>This hurts the poor and middle class waay more than "muh undeserving rich kids" who very very rarely remain rich from inherence.
Where the fuck do you get this shit from? Do you imagine we'll just lap it up without asking? Do you imagine I've never heard of a trust fund?
>the concept of not being able to pass down what you worked for to give your children a better life is absolutely abhorrent
To who? You? Because I can guarantee you it's a "meh" issue to those who don't have pot to piss in, let alone a billion dollars to pass down. Are you by any chance one of those genetic waste of spaces who's just waiting for mom and pop to shuffle off, so you can spend the rest of your life also doing nothing and claiming it's fair?
The concept of dead people giving stuff away is what has caused the massive economic bludgeon in the first place. Money is power, and power generates money. If you don't have a mechanism to prevent this from getting out of hand, your civilization will collapse.
Why is greed always so fucking stupid? I'm not even asking for all of their wealth. Just enough to prevent poor people from getting an opportunity to "live the dream". How many Einsteins spent their lives as short order chef's, because they came from Hell's Kitchen instead of Ann Arbour?
>Who gives a shit about other families? I don't care if I'm better of than those families in detroit and other shit heel towns because just being born in this family makes me better off. It's such a straw man to try to switch it from a family wide to a country wide statistic
>Where the fuck do you get this shit from? Do you imagine we'll just lap it up without asking? Do you imagine I've never heard of a trust fund?
So now you're arguing against your own position of "m m m nuh trust fund kiddies"
> To who? You? Because I can guarantee you it's a "meh" issue to those who don't have pot to piss in, let alone a billion dollars to pass down
I'm middle class
The inherence tax you suggest would mean I get nothing from my parents which would put massive strain on my future.
My families small business simply wouldn't exist if said tax existed because the modest sim used to start it would have been taxed away.
>block of insults
This is why you're a nigger wanting to take shit from people because of sheer envy.
> If you don't have a mechanism to prevent this from getting out of hand, your civilization will collapse.
You're following a absolute red herring you ignorant sambo. The issue is that the government can take from some and give to others. Expansion of this isbonky going to make it worse as it has.
Get to reading I'm not spoon feeding this to your dumb ass
>The concept of dead people giving stuff away is what has caused the massive economic bludgeon in the first place.
Forgot to add
This statement is objectively false and you're a faggoy for repeating such debunked claims
>Literally a sentence before the one you quoted
And is outdated and used a different fallacious methodology to come to such a conclusion as explained in the article I posted. There is a deliberate reason leftist with an agenda never ever ever look at IRS income data and instead focus on abstract brackets. Doing this is the equivalent of being told "A man gets hit by a car every 20 minutes in new York city" and responding with "well he must get awfully tired of that".
So you're relying on both an outdated and fallacious study to back up your shitty and wrong agenda driven position.
How am I arguing against my own posit? You are the one who said rich kids don't stay rich (they mostly do. They may piss away a lot of money, but this isn't Hollywood. Very rarely do they end up in absolute poverty)
>The inherence tax you suggest
I made no such suggestion. Well done for having such a good argument you needed to put words in my mouth
>This is why you're a nigger wanting to take shit from people because of sheer envy.
Again, putting out shit I never claimed. I have worked my entire life, including serving my country. I have done many low paid jobs that no-one wanted to do, and did them because they needed doing, and because my needs are few and it was a living wage. I never complained.
Your inability to understand that not everyone you meet is as greedy and self-serving as you are is the root of the problem here, I think. You assume your default position of "fuck you, I'm all right" is shared willingly by everyone, and it isn't. I am concerned not for my own welfare but for the welfare of my country.
I can, and have read thank you.
>calls me an ignorant sambo
>posts a link to the moneymasters
You are a fucking joke wearing the garbage gown of an intellectual. I have read Smith, Keynes and Friedman. I don't need your advice on economics (which seem to be based on "how can I make this work for me" rather than "this is how it actually is").
In a back and forth lasting nearly an hour, all you have done is spout unprovable memes to support your greed. It's all you people ever do, because it's all you people ever have.
And how do you know that specific article does that?
Also within the article you endorsed in
>“It matters more who your parents are today than it did in the past,” Mr. Chetty said.
>And how do you know that specific article does that
Because I've actually read it
You aren't posting anything I haven't already seen and studies like the one you're posting have existed using identical methodology for decades to push this agenda.
State seizure of all wealth at point of death. offset against income tax for the poorest.
You want to give your kids something? Do it on your deathbed, or even better, do it now! Dead bodies don't own stuff, because they cannot make a claim it's theirs if there is a dispute. They can't give stuff away either, cos their mouth, mind and muscles don't work. That's why it's called will-power. You can't "will" someone your fortune if you can't will.
Gradually, over generations, accidents and fuckups will ensure a more even spread of wealth, while still allowing for personal achievement.
>I made no such suggestion. Well done for having such a good argument you needed to put words in my mouth
And you're now an admitted liar
>State seizure of all wealth at point of death. offset against income tax for the poorest.
Again you're complaining against greed
Tell us how it isn't greed to want to use the force of the state to take money from someone and give it to others to which it never belonged?
Even if that is true, (Why look at IRS tax data when the rich has tax evasion and the poor don't) you still haven't address the point i made that even the article that you endorsed claims that upward mobility is still low.
>, (Why look at IRS tax data when the rich has tax evasion and the poor don't) you still haven't address the point i made that even the article that you endorsed claims that upward mobility is still low.
It is identical to what it has always been
Which isn't that low compared to the rest of the world.
And again you've refused to even read the article postrd why the IRS data is the correct data to use.
>implying wealth inequality is even a bad thing in and of itself
only when wealth is gained through force is it negative
I am a patient man, so I will abide by the unthinking mumblings of fools, and try to explain this to you once more.
I had MADE no such claim when I posted that response. I made the suggestion to seize all wealth after that point. But fair enough, you see that as a tax, and I can see why you would think that, even though it's not.
You want to avoid paying my death duty. I can see that. Who wouldn't? Well, it's simple. Give your money to your children 1 hour, 1 minute, 1 SECOND before you stop breathing, and I won't ask for a bean. Fair?
It's not a tax, btw, because no-one is being taxed. The wealth is being stripped from a piece of meat. It cannot protest, appeal or claim it is being oppressed or targeted. It has no protection under the law, because you cannot cause distress or alarm to a corpse, and therefore you cannot trespass against it.
>Tell us how it isn't greed to want to use the force of the state to take money from someone and give it to others to which it never belonged?
Er...because I'm giving it to others, and not keeping it for myself?
(boy, you greedy people sure are thick)
Men can do incredible things no matter their upbringing or "unjust" birth circumstances.
Which inof itself is an insane idea because to fight this you're waging war against the very cosmos themselves to gain this warped idea if Rawlsian "justice" which necessitates quite literally infinite power to redress these "injustices".
I've asked about this before, and didn't get any info, but both Based Sowell and Based Shapiro talk about the three things you have to do to escape permanent poverty in the US:
>don't have kids before you're married
>graduate high school
>don't go to jail
Does anyone have a source to the data they get this from?
>I am a patient man, so I will abide by the unthinking mumblings of fools, and try to explain this to you once more.
>I had MADE no such claim when I posted that response
Calling others fool for preempting your own argument because it is so damn predictable is only representative of yourself.
> Well, it's simple. Give your money to your children 1 hour, 1 minute, 1 SECOND before you stop breathing, and I won't ask for a bean. Fair
>Because all deaths are some movie esque deathbed and wills haven't been invented forever ago to address unexpected death.
No it isn't fair.
> It's not a tax, btw, because no-one is being taxed.
The family of the deceased is being taxed.
> Er...because I'm giving it to others, and not keeping it for myself?
If I come.mug you and then give what I take to a homeless man is it not theft?
>the west's fault
The west used to have their own sweatshops until workers demanded better working conditions and better pay. When Asians do this too, their situation will change.
No you're just a retard that can't read
But the very opposite conclusion arises in studies that follow actual flesh-and-blood individuals over time, most of whom move up across the various income brackets with the passing years. Most working Americans who were initially in the bottom 20 percent of income-earners, rise out of that bottom 20 percent. More of them end up in the top 20 percent than remain in the bottom 20 percent.
People who were initially in the bottom 20 percent in income have had the highest rate of increase in their incomes, while those who were initially in the top 20 percent have had the lowest. This is the direct opposite of the pattern found when following income brackets over time, rather than following individual people.
Most of the media publicize what is happening to the statistical brackets -- especially that "top one percent" -- rather than what is happening to individual people.
We should be concerned with the economic fate of flesh-and-blood human beings, not waxing indignant over the fate of abstract statistical brackets. Unless, of course, we are hustling for an expansion of the welfare state.
YES! YES! YES! Because I am not a commie. I just want to introduce a mechanism which will gradually level the playing field. There will be enough rich-guy meets sportscar accidents over the centuries to ensure vast pools of wealth are periodically re-distributed outside the family.
You will have to actually give your wealth to your children, btw. I'm not sure what you mean by "sign over the vast majority", but if you mean "they can have this when I'm gone" it's no different to the current setup. You will have to actually give them the money (and watch them squander it, possibly)
>a theory of justice
>if you put 20 people in a room and asked them to design society with no knowledge of their own position or skills, they will end up with socialism
>just accept this guys trust me
kek, a genius philosopher
Sweatshops are more of a symptom of an undeveloped economy that doesn't have the capital investment of a wealthier nation. Working conditions improve as businessmen figure out ways to make them economically viable, not by state writ.
That is such a crappy heap of half-chewed ideas I'm not even going to address them. You need to get your head around the idea that what you've thought is right your whole life might just possibly be...not. And cherry-picking data to misrepresent just makes you look impulsive and undereducated, btw. Enjoy your parents middling wealth, and I'm sure you aren't going to let a moaning minnie like me from spoiling your perfect life.
But you are the problem. And you know it, even if you won't admit it.
if you buy a decent product your odds of it coming from a sweatshop are pretty low. Even for something like a sweatshirt... if you buy a knockoff like at a souvenir shop quality it may be sweatshop, but from a legit store most likely not. China doesn't really have them any more, the cheapest labour cost is constantly moving to the poorest place. And as mentioned the cheapest labor will not meet quality standards.
>if I draw false analogies as multi-part animated comics maybe people will think they're not retarded
ignoring that it's not zero-sum and that the people crammed into that tiny room in the analogy are actually living on luxurious welfare where they get housing accommodations, food, and medical care for free and spending money on top
>That is such a crappy heap of half-chewed ideas I'm not even going to address them. You need to get your head around the idea that what you've thought is right your whole life might just possibly be...not.
Tell that to yourself
The issue we see today is a direct result of government bring able to redistribute wealth.
>B B but this time it will be different
Isn't an argument
Unfortunately libs don't want to distribute the building fairly.
They want to tear down the entire building except for the are the 50% own, then use the materials to build a nicer building across the street, using the 50% as the laborers.