America's 1% Has Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%

America's 1% Has Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90% - And that's Made the U.S. Less Secure | Time



$50 trillion has been transfered upward since the beginning of the neoliberal period 40 years ago. Had the more equitable income distributions of the New Deal era (1945-1974) continued, the aggregate annual income of the bottom 90% of Americans would have been $2.5 trillion higher in the year 2018 alone.

According to a 2019 Reuters/Ipsos poll, 54% of Americans don't think the top 1% should be allowed to keep their wealth if that means increasing inequality. That is a core Marxist view.

Majority of Americans favor wealth tax on very rich: Reuters/Ipsos poll

A much larger majority would likely favor transitioning to a worker co-op based economy.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/socialism-explained-by-prof-richard-wolff.577403/

Chris Hedges: Karl Marx Was Right



Marx's Labor Theory of Value: How Capitalism Is Theft

 

When capitalism is skewed to be good only for the few, the ruling elite it must be reformed as FDR did in order to save capitalism from human excesses, greed.

And the reforms of FDR did save it, from Marxism. Marxism has never worked to serve a citizenry very well..Yet the left somehow believe this time it will work!

So, you don't embrace the flawed thinking of Marxism even if Marx was right on a couple observations!. Even a broken clock is right twice a day!

Instead capitalism must be fixed as FDR did.. Capitalism served us so well post ww2. And we know the changes that did it.. So we can know what both parties did
to destroy that post Ww2 capitalism! Its right there in congressional record!

Eventually we will have to save capitalism from Marxism again . And capitalism is worth saving given it can serve our people while Marxism can't. Neolib capitalism leads to the same place as Marxism does.. A well to do but small upper class and vast poverty for the rest.

Only a regulated and managed capitalism has optimally served average Americans and created history's largest middle class. That is historical record and we can know what FDR did to arrive there. And what improved income disparity ..

Americans have always admired the rich so long as the rich didn't try to get it all!

 

Another steaming pile of misleading garbage. Of course most people want others to pay more taxes. Using a global scale, you are in the top 1%. You enjoy luxuries most people on Earth can only dream of. (Clean water, food, the internet, not being murdered, etc)

Can we count on you to give 90% of your money away to help humanity or do you not care about your fellow man?

 

So the choice isn't poisonous and destructive neolib capitalism or Marxism! Its reformed capitalism that serves our nation and all of her people!

How profs like wolf can support the failure of Marxism is crazy. Marxism always fails..And we have used capitalism to great success in the past when it was not skewed to destroy our middle by the excesses of the sociopaths at the top.

 

How do you take wealth from the poor?

 

Socialism was never established in the Soviet Union, China or Vietnam. Lenin abolished workers' control in Russia and replaced one hierarchy with another. He called it "state capitalism," which is what it was. Stalin called it socialism but he also called his country a "people's democracy." Reforms will always be undone by the capitalists just as the New Deal was.

 

I doubt most people.want others to pay more taxes! So that's bs too.lol

But what Americans do want is their labor being worth a living wage. Without an advanced degree being required. Like it used to be. Not all people can acquire advanced degrees and that has always been the case! And yet we saw a huge middle rise here by working hard and being paid fairly .And not having to compete with the poor from 3rd world **** holes controlled by those who have the gold.

Our founders were for our people not against them.. They didn't destroy us so a few elites could be maximally wealthy.

I don't believe in a wealth tax. But I believe in using capitalism to provide a living for all Americans! By work. And using our own people to make what we buy . Yet the loose screw nuts don't believe we can do that! Even when we did that for most our history.

 

Fine. Reuters fabricated the poll.

 

Yet Marxism the various forms have failed. Yet the Marxists think next time it will work! The optimism keeps it alive as an idea. That it goes against basic human nature is its flaw. There is also this idea that it can change man yet human nature corrupts it and that nature gives us a corruption of Marxism. We change Marxism Marxism doesn't change human nature..

Reforms like the new deal are killed by the greed of the top. Sociopaths. And happen when the dems stopped caring about non elites.. And moved to the right.

The GOP had to have the dems to help them in dismantling the new deal. And that is what the DP did..

There is one caveat in your favor concerning Marxism. Anytime south American nations tried to choose Marxism we intervened ..And tried to destroy it ..To protect the interests of corporations like United Fruit!

 

What the **** are you talking about?

President Jacobo Arbenz wasn't a Marxist, junior. He was a Social Democrat. He modeled his programs on FDR's New Deal.

 

Ah so. More commie propaganda from someone who thinks the economy is a zero sum game.

 

Make your case.

 

Well first of all, do you acknowledge the economy is not a zero sum game? And what is with the cartoon-like use of fonts? It really distracts from trying to have a serious discussion of ideas.

 

Now, here is the IRONY.
Under Marxism the elite WILL TAKE THE LOT.
That's why the Chinese in "corrupt" Saigon 1975 buried their gold - the uncorrupt North Vietnamese
Stalinists simple believed that whatever they owned now belonged to the Communist Party. That's
theft on a super-grand scale.
Amongst the wealthiest people in the 20th Century, in their respective countries, would be Stalin, Mao,
Castro etc.. These people didn't own a lot, they owned everything. Never has there been a recipe for
power and wealth like Communism.
Rockefeller controlled about 2% of the wealth of America (note - controlled is a more accurate word
than owned) About double what Bezos has today. But a Mao or a Stalin had the entire economy at
their disposal - and more, they wrote the laws and had power over what you thought or even whether
you lived or died.
Don't give me any Marxist claptrap.

 

What I believe is that the system itself is the problem and that we can do better. Why not democratize the economy? What is your argument against a worker co-op based economy? Why do you prefer being exploited by a totalitarian institution? You're not being paid for the value you create.

 

I never found myself to be exploited. I always had the choice to work for someone or start my own business and I have done both. Of course I made the effort to acquire skills and knowledge that people were willing to pay for. Nothing that I am aware of stops anyone from creating and operating a worker owned business in the US. The economy is democratized. Anyone can start a business.

Getting back to the zero sum game - you seem to think that anyone who succeeds does so by exploiting someone that has failed to succeed. That is not the way things work.

As far as economic theory goes, if you want to tout Marxist theory provide some examples where it has worked. I know the communist system was a total failure in producing goods that consumers wanted to have, e.g., houses, cars, appliances, etc.

 

Many people do not realize that if you throw the top 1% into the sausage maker, you are tanking their own retirements completely.

 

A worker co-op based economy means no more capitalist corporations, no more inequality. Never been put in practice anywhere. People keep bringing up the Soviet Union and China. Those were state capitalist systems. The workers had no power. They were slaves.

 

You were exploited and you have exploited. It's built into capitalism. There's no getting around it.

 

I do sympathize, and agree, overall with the premise of the OP.

I am not a marxist, nor do I believe one has to believe in communism to accept the premise in the title, one can be a liberal democrat, and accept it.

Now, you bring up some other points espoused by Marx, but that should be the subject of it's own thread, so your OP is fragmented, fractured, unfocused on a single theme. After reading your post, your subject moves away from the title onto espousing general marixt ideas. If that is the case, then your title should reflect this, but it doesn't.

the title gives us the impression that it will be focused on the theme established, but, after opening the thread and reading your OP, it's not.

However, might I suggest that you Abstain from overdoing screenshots, in favor of typed or cutted and pasted quotes, linking to the source.?

It would be the more courteous approach.

Because, the way you post is very annoying, and it is probably for any detractor, whom you might want to reach, as well

 

how do people who create value take from those who trade with them? Jimmy Page puts out a record and 1000000 people pay 15 dollars a piece to buy it. Has he taken 15000000 from them?

 

as long as investment pays off, those who earn more than they have to spend will increase their wealth

 

Marxists like to pretend that if someone gains wealth, someone else losses wealth. Untrue.

Capitalism drives prices down, quality up, and leads to a prosperous nation.