Millionaires, Billionaires Own 79% of America's Wealth

I gave the reason. This is just a blatant attempt at bullying and personal attacks only done by those who have no ability to present anything else which I seem to remember with you from our one previous meeting.

 

First and foremost, never confuse American style Unions with Europe Unions (like in Germany) they are not in the same ball park/ way different. European style Unions work with companies , American style Unions do not and became corrupt to the core.

 

Your previous post literally said "you are all brainwashed from the moment you are born" and NOW you're concerned about personal attacks? Does your hypocrisy know no limits?

 

can you give me some objective links to show this.

 

That is what I have heard from Americans. That is that American people are brainwashed from the moment they are born to believe that Capitalism/neo liberalism means freedom whereas socialism means the opposite and that is something which is strongly shown by many people on forums supporting something which goes against their own interest, continually saying it is freedom when it is anything but.

Next personal attack from you is reported. You waste time and never in my experience have anything to say just use personal attacks.

 

I can't teach common knowledge and wisdom your asking me to do the impossible

 

There are 1/3 of a billion people in this country. You "heard" from a minuscule handful of them and assumed it would apply to all 330 million of us? I don't know if I could say anything more to impeach your position than you already have.

 

Sounds about right. Rich and poor are not dollar amounts; they are a set of habits. Poor people spend until they are broke, and then borrow. Rich people see the dollar as an employee and put it to work.

Personally, I like to be in between. Invest, but live a little.

 

So a fancy dressed up personal attack. If Unions in the US had been as you said different to Europe you would easily have been able to provide me with a few objective sources to describe what had gone wrong. The same was said about UK unions though as I said the reason they kept going on strike was because of inflation. At that time the UK papers were reporting less than truthful things which some people would have believed. You claimed US Unions did not work with Companies. This appears not to be true

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States

Looks like they were much the same as European Unions.

As you are unable to provide me with any sources to back up your claim that American Unions unlike European Unions were corrupt to the core. I shall have a look later.

I can see you are new and would suggest you read the rules.

 

Once again I can't teach/link wisdom you have over a 100 years worth of data to go through. But a recent example could be in Tennessee with the Volvo plant, the company itself wanted Unions because they where so used to working well with them in Europe. On the other hand the workers where so used to American Unions they voted no .

 

Damn, what a shock, Rich people are rich poor people are poor. Who knew?

Good news! Due to capitalism you live in one of the only countries in the world where you do not have to stay poor.

 

You are on a debate forum. You just saying something and making claims that you are more educated and wise than me suggest you are ignorant on the subject. If you make a claim you need to be able to back it up. You said that American Unions differed from European Unions in that they did not work with their companies, which was not true and that they were corrupt which you have shown nothing to verify and on having searched I got no results so I assume that also is not true.

That in no way proves that American Unions did not work with their companies and were corrupt. To find out what it is saying would require it was looked into. Without doing that you do not have a clue. I have just watched someone pretending to be a Wallmart employee saying how Unions were trying to get people from Wallmart to join them but they did not want to. This is called propaganda. It is not a real worker from walmart saying what he really thinks.

I haven't been able to find any information on your Volvo story. Perhaps you would like to provide some.

There are however areas where I can see the US has differed from Europe One of them began shortly after WW2 and used the one I left out of the US Propaganda. The Big One COMMUNISM. The US differs from Europe in that it has never allowed freedom of political point of view. In the UK for instance we had, possibly still have, a communist Party and we took in many of the people deported from your shores for being communist. This goes with the brainwashing which American's are subject to. You may believe you have free speech. You may even believe you have it more than European Countries but you do not. Your freedom is massively curtailed as you are not allowed freedom of political viewpoint which is a must in a genuinely democratic country...and this was used against Unions. The thing in question is the Taft-Hartley Act.

https://psmag.com/economics/what-caused-the-decline-of-unions-in-america

This act stoped Unions in the US from being able to grow as they did in Europe which will have kept Labour weaker in the US. The article goes on to explain how this made American Workers particularly vulnerable to Regan Thatcher Neo Liberalism.

It is not workers who are destroying Union Rights in the US it is Corporate Power. It is not workers who are making adverts like the one supposedly in Walmart I mentioned. It is Corporate Power. They are not interested in your wellbeing but only in being able to hire you at the cheapest rate possible and keeping unemployment high so that you will work for even less.

Now Union Rights have been reduced in the UK and much of Europe as well since Neo Liberalism and Globalisation came into being. The papers of the time in the UK told the people how greedy the Unions were just like you complain is the case in the US. I told you this was not the situation. The Unions were trying to beat inflation to get dinner on the table. Workers would come to an agreement almost always to create more productivity in return for higher wages. They had come to a point where that was no longer possible. To want to be able to feed their families in such a situation is not greedy and anyone who thinks it is must have been born with a diamond spoon in their mouth and be completely lacking in empathy. We knew from what had happened before what happened if you allowed Monopolies and Corporate Power to rule. The 30's and fascism were what happened. Just like we are seeing signs of today. People in the UK were taken a bit by shock at Thatcher/Regan managing to put back in a system which was going to create massive inequality. They thought we had got to the point that the natural solution to the situation was workers co-op's. We are in the same position today.

 

Let's work through your list of 'reasons':

1) A good paying job means much greater opportunity to save for a rainy day - choices.
2) No one is forced to conceive a child - choices.
3) There is no such thing as food insecurity in the First World. There is plenty of obesity though - choices.
4) Saving for a rainy day means 'bad luck' won't devastate you - choices.

All freely made choices. If you dispute that these are freely made choices, you'll need to explain how they're enforced. Otherwise accept that they are indeed 'at fault events'.

 

Of course people are still getting ahead. It's reality, all over the First World. Heck, people are even thriving as a result of COVID, because they adapted their business or income model to exploit the conditions.

There is a growing underclass (homeless, unemployed, under-employed, life-renters, etc) in our larger cities because that's what the white power elite on the Left has designed. Any large city with a fundamentally Leftist public office, will keep heading that way until there's no one left but the very rich, and the very poor. That's the purpose of the Welfare State .. to create a wealth (aka, power) divide.

 

Admitting that means admitting you have to do something about it. Much easier to pretend someone else is making you spend all your money on fast food and $200 shoes.

 

1) No, it doesn’t circumstances
2) Accidents happen no choice (especially if abortion is outlawed)
3) Obesity is caused by poor food quality, not always overeating science
4) It is impossible to save when you live paycheck to paycheck

 

The Left-Right paradigm is for the simple minded. Life and human relations is far more complex than that simple paradigm.

 

I am not reading that crap, it's not my fault you don't have wordly wisdom to comprehend the huge difference between european Unions and American ones, once again european Unions work with companies to help them succeed , american Unions are just in it for themselves.

 

I agree with that in principal, but there is a clear agenda on one side which leads directly to increasing human misery. That's an important thing to talk about.

 

1) Take ten people all earning the same and with similar cost of living. I guarantee they'll all retire with very different financial positions. That's not magic, or luck, or beauty, or intelligence, or whatever excuses you call 'circumstances'. It's a result of CHOICES.
2) Pregnancy is the easiest thing in the world to avoid. We know how babies are made, these days. CHOICES.
3) Obesity is caused by CHOICES. Unbelievable that you're actually denying that. As though someone is forcing people to eat badly.
5) So don't live pay to pay. Find a cheaper way to live. Move in with family. Move to a cheaper location. Don't spend money on things you can't afford. CHOICES.

 

Absolutely, I agree

So no one has ever had a condom break or birth control fail? I disagree

Obesity has to do with consuming too much calories, which is heavily condensed in unhealthy (cheap) food. I don’t believe children have much choice what their parents feed them.

What if you don’t have family? Can’t afford to move?


I don’t see number four

 

Some economists were asked about this years ago. At that time, they said it would take about a year, but the outliers on both ends could switch. Makes sense.

 

yeah, a year could be right. It doesn’t matter how much money you give people. Without the right mentality, they will piss it away. Rich people are rich for a reason. They know how to make money work.

 

Education is the key to everything. We don't value it enough. We need to get the fed out of the business of being teachers.

 

1) If you're not in a position to raise a child, don't rely on fallible contraception. Again, pregnancy is easy to avoid.

2) Children don't make life choices, so it's disingenuous to resort to that argument. This about adults - adults being the vast majority of obese people, and the ones making life choices.

3) Who has no family? Apart from orphans born to two people who were both an only child and who both had deceased parents? Resorting to exceptions means you've lost the argument.

4) Moving somewhere cheaper does not require additional money, obviously. If you've been living in the more expensive place, then you can afford the less expensive place. Your question makes zero sense. Moving to save money is a financial gain, not a loss.