The true extent of wealth disparity in the USA

Page 5 of 8 [ 121 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

adb
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

07 Nov 2013, 4:38 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

Adb, from last post on page 4
LOL! Obviously you are being sarcastic. Only an idiot would feel sorry for a group of people that ruined the economy and stole billions from the middle class.
See the above videos.

Over 75% of CEOs are middle class. You're bashing people based on a job title.

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,523
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

07 Nov 2013, 4:38 pm

” Am I to take this as an acquiescence of my points, or did you simply overlook my posts on the subject?”
Viper
Actually, as I said (over and over) If cooperatives are huge or not, or giving a list of huge corporations has NOTHING to do with the topic. However, considering that you want to concentrate on minutia that has nothing to do with the topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_em ... _companies
http://www.nceo.org/articles/employee-ownership-100
Of course you may go deeper into unrelated areas (because I proved your arguments were outrageously invalid. If I created a company the size of Wall Mart has nothing to do with the proposition: cooperatives give power to the creators of value and remove it from those that merely gamble with other people’s money.)and get into the minutia of the difference between a cooperative and employee owned. You still do not get the point that companies that are controlled by employees do better. True, they may not make the 1% richer, but they make me, you and the entire middle class richer. Whereas Wall Street makes us poorer. As seen by the fact that Wall Street and the banks created the current economic crisis.

_________________
YES! This is me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gtdlR4rUcY
I went up over 50 feet!
I love debate!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtckVng_1a0
My debate style is calm and deadly!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-230v_ecAcM

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

07 Nov 2013, 4:41 pm

GGPViper wrote:

[*]Have inefficient wage structures (wage levels are likely to be set by majority vote, and not according to the skill of the individual)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc[/youtube]

_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,523
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

07 Nov 2013, 4:41 pm

Adb,
Read my posts before posting. It is clear that I am not referring to a CEO of a mom and pop grocery store. Look at the sites I gave!!
For example, the first site given at the top of this page. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fraud- ... 2013-08-28 At least read that post that you responded to, I did not even mention CEOs.

Last edited by wittgenstein on 07 Nov 2013, 4:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,523
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

07 Nov 2013, 4:43 pm

“Grow up.”
Viper
Glad to see Viper is continuing his mature posting style! He does this to everyone, not just me.

adb
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

07 Nov 2013, 4:57 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

Adb,
Read my posts before posting. It is clear that I am not referring to a CEO of a mom and pop grocery store.
At least read that post that you responded to, I did not even mention CEOs.

There are maybe 20,000 CEOs that make over a million a year. Are you also not referring to CEOs of companies with 500 employees? How about Bill Gates, who gives billions away to charitable causes?

Perhaps you should read your own posts before posting. You did, in fact, mention CEOs. So did the article you referenced, which was not specific to a group of CEOs. The title itself vilified CEO's in general.

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,523
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

07 Nov 2013, 5:02 pm

Good grief! So the Wall Street Journal is showing prejudice against capitalism *. Listen, it’s just common sense. If you got confused and thought I was talking about a CEO of a mom and pop grocery store, I apologize. I will try to make things more elementary.
*Here is that site you mentioned.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fraud- ... 2013-08-28

RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

07 Nov 2013, 5:03 pm

GGPViper wrote:

RushKing wrote:

It is not impossible for a worker cooperative to lay people off and I believe unemployment is an unfortunate issue enterprises (socialist or capitalist) within markets can't eliminate.

Why should it be eliminated? Why should companies keep useless employees around?

I didn't say it should be eliminated. Unemployment has implications in a market that wouldn't be in other types of economies.

GGPViper wrote:

RushKing wrote:

Because the world economy is a capitalist one. Not because socialist firms are inefficient. The elites go through great lengths to control us.

Conspiracy theory. PPR has enough of those already...

No conspiracy theory here.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AnB8MuQ6DU[/youtube]

GGPViper wrote:

RushKing wrote:

I never claimed worker cooperatives were more prevalent, what I said was they aren't inefficient and are capable of making relatively large investments.

But they are *not* capable of making "relatively large investments", as demonstrated by their insignificance in the global economy.

Their small prevalence in the global economy is is the sign of the violent property regime enforced by states. It's not because they aren't capable.

GGPViper wrote:

RushKing wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

Judging by the dearth of worker cooperatives compared to classical capitalist firms, I would say that such an incentive is probably almost completely irrelevant. Most people (including every single publicly employed individual on the planet) seem to be quite capable of functioning within hierarchies.

Lets forget about those 200+ years of violent labor history. Human beings must love hierarchy. :lol:

Grow up. The vast majority of individuals in rich developed countries work in a hierarchy. The "No Boss" environment is mostly a pipe dream...

No, you have admitted the fact that it exists in this thread. Do people form hierarchies when they get together with their friends?

Last edited by RushKing on 07 Nov 2013, 5:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,523
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

07 Nov 2013, 5:08 pm

adb,
Anyway, good strategy! Make the debate about semantics and not substance. However, most people know that when I am talking about Wall Street and CEOs, I am not talking about a mom and pop grocery store.
I doubt very much, that you will have much success in making people feel sorry for Wall Street and billionaire CEOs.

GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

07 Nov 2013, 5:15 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

First of all...

LEARN TO USE THE QUOTE FUNCTION!

... ahem...

Second of all, your arguments are mostly semantic. Try getting to the point instead.

Third of all, many employee-owned-companies (why don't you stick to one definition?) are not worker cooperatives. They use employee stock ownership plans. And they are not necessarily good investments.

wittgenstein wrote:

You still do not get the point that companies that are controlled by employees do better. True, they may not make the 1% richer, but they make me, you and the entire middle class richer. Whereas Wall Street makes us poorer. As seen by the fact that Wall Street and the banks created the current economic crisis.

Source? Evidence? Data?

GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

07 Nov 2013, 5:26 pm

RushKing wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

RushKing wrote:

It is not impossible for a worker cooperative to lay people off and I believe unemployment is an unfortunate issue enterprises (socialist or capitalist) within markets can't eliminate.

Why should it be eliminated? Why should companies keep useless employees around?

I didn't say it should be eliminated. Unemployment has implications in a market that wouldn't be in other types of economies.

Any other extant or extinct type of economy is inferior to the market economy. So far, "superior" economies only exist on paper written by false Scotsmen.

RushKing wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

RushKing wrote:

Because the world economy is a capitalist one. Not because socialist firms are inefficient. The elites go through great lengths to control us.

Conspiracy theory. PPR has enough of those already...

No conspiracy theory here.

[Chomsky crap omitted]

Invoking Chomsky in a discussion about economics is almost the equivalent of Godwin's Law.

RushKing wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

RushKing wrote:

I never claimed worker cooperatives were more prevalent, what I said was they aren't inefficient and are capable of making relatively large investments.

But they are *not* capable of making "relatively large investments", as demonstrated by their insignificance in the global economy.

Their small prevalence in the global economy is is the sign of the violent property regime enforced by states. It's not because they aren't capable.

Non-falsifiable, thus BS.

RushKing wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

Grow up. The vast majority of individuals in rich developed countries work in a hierarchy. The "No Boss" environment is mostly a pipe dream...

No, you have admitted the fact that it exists in this thread.

So, you accept my "No Boss" argument, then...

Which one are you? The motivated private entrepreneur? Or the spoiled brat?

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,523
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

07 Nov 2013, 5:28 pm

Viper,
I am sorry that you could not tell where the quote started and ended in the example you gave. Luckily, no one else had a problem. I am tired of making things so incredibly elementary for you to understand.
Anyway, I proved that your arguments are invalid. Unfortunately, you still think that somehow the fact that I did not create a company the size of Wall Mart is proof that cooperatives do not give power to those that create value.
As I said previously, it* DOES NOT MATTER, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PROPOSITION, that there are huge private companies.
* The proposition that cooperatives hand power to those that create value.

GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

07 Nov 2013, 5:45 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

wittgenstein, you are barely even capable of constructing a meaningful sentence. I do not consider myself intellectually challenged by you. since you lack the ability to even spell the word "Asperger". So please keep your condescending tone to a minimum.

Your creation of value argument is also nothing more than a tired repetition of the labor theory of value proposed by Karl Marx, which has been debunked many decades ago.

adb
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

07 Nov 2013, 5:54 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

adb,
Anyway, good strategy! Make the debate about semantics and not substance.

I wasn't participating in the debate. I was expressing displeasure with the unqualified demonization of CEOs. This was a tangent.

Quote:

However, most people know that when I am talking about Wall Street and CEOs, I am not talking about a mom and pop grocery store.

Mom and pop grocery stores don't typically have a CEO. Corporations with a real board of directors have a CEO. If you're going to talk about CEOs, at least take the time to understand the meaning of the title.

As I said before, I was expressing displeasure with the unqualified demonization of CEOs.

Quote:

I doubt very much, that you will have much success in making people feel sorry for Wall Street and billionaire CEOs.

I'm not trying to make people feel sorry for Wall Street and billionaire CEOs. I'm trying to discourage people from using an invalid generalization. If you want to complain about corrupt executives, I'll agree with you 100% -- I don't like corruption either. But if you want to complain about CEOs without qualifying it, I'll call you out on your demonization of a job title.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,511
Location: the island of defective toy santas

07 Nov 2013, 6:08 pm

thomas81 wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

[*]Have inefficient wage structures (wage levels are likely to be set by majority vote, and not according to the skill of the individual)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc[/youtube]

the world is divided between those who want to make it a better place, and those who are content merely to watch it burn.

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

07 Nov 2013, 6:19 pm

The point is, money isn't necessarily the 'great motivator' that advocates of greater wealth disparity advocate.

People want autonomy, mastery of their own destiny and purpose. Money is a distant fourth factor.

_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile

Page 5 of 8 [ 121 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

The true extent of wealth disparity in the USA Post Reply New Topic

The true extent of wealth disparity in the USA