What percentage of the wealthy would it take?

I can say it because in the long term it does not work. The world moves on without you.

 

Of some other more famous "consumer protection" laws, one until recently banned US beef from Japan because "Japanese intestines were the wrong length and couldn't digest US beef which is too hard" (today, though US beef is allowed in Japan, in practice it must often come from a Japanese owned ranch in the US). Another law banned european skiis because the snow in Japan was "different". All foreign rice is banned for "national security"[Agents of Influence p11]. Rice in Japan as a consequence, is the most expensive in the world. Finally, as an example of the no-foreign ownership rule, the recent baseball team fiasco comes to mind: Nintendo recently bought the Seattle Mariners Pro Baseball team. Americans however, are not allowed to buy Japanese Pro baseball teams [ABC News Nightline].

 

When you can put your competition out of business and make billions doing it and use those billions to buy up American business and property, you are doing quite well. Where do you think all the profit from Universal Studios goes? You don't see Japan having to sell bonds to us to pay their bills. We would be shocked at all the money that leaves this country. It's not hard to see why we're in the shape we're in. China is just as bad, they just do it differently.

 

That's all gone.

4. In 1995 the US Threatened Tough Retaliation against Japan and Signed a Market Opening Agreement with the Japanese Government
x All of these pressures came to a head in the mid 1990s, when the USTR, at the direction of President Clinton threatened to impose 100% tariffs on Japan’s luxury autos, if the government did not agree to fully open its market to U.S. auto and auto parts. x This major agreement, called the l995 MOU, was seen as a major success at the time in securing Japanese agreement to a free and open market. When the 1995 MOU was signed, total auto import share in Japan was 5%. Today, 15 years later, it is less than 4%.

http://www.americanautocouncil.org/sites/aapc2016/files/Japans+Protected+Auto+Market.pdf

 

We bitch because we don't have good paying jobs and what do we do? California and NY get China to build their bridges for them and some roads. Not only build their bridges, but use Chinese steel to do it. Trump made it a law if new projects are built, they must use American steel. We do nothing to protect American business. If anything, we have a war against them, to keep them from competing. Then everyone wants trash Trump for trying to reverse it.

 

Trouble is, it's decades to late. We have lost most of those businesses. We have gotten to the point we would go belly up if we couldn't sell our bonds to pay our bills. We have allowed these countries to walk all over us and put us in the shape we're in.

 

Yeah, sure. And the US has a 350% tariff on tobacco and a 35% tariff on brooms. So what? Other than making witch hunts more popular who cares.
The US protects it's farmers with subsidies. Canada does it with milk. Get used to it. Roll up your sleeves and compete.

 

The new cost of US steel will kill those projects even if you could find welders to put them together.

 

Why? Sure prices will go up some. Americans want to make a decent wage. Isn't that the complaint? If you want better pay you have to be willing to pay for it. You can't have one without the other.

 

Thats not just SJW that define it that way, so I guess you then ask how much it would take for that second category?

That would depend on "the needs" of the populace.

If you see the current spending and deficit it would barely cost anything more, just fill the deficit and you would be there.
If you would of course expand those needs then the question is how far?

 

The long and short of it is that the phrase social justice is at best ill define and a worst an amorphous term that means a dozen different things to a dozen different people. It is a catchall that isn't design to describe a problem but to invoke angst in the unthinking. It can mean someone some where has more stuff than I do or it can just be another way of issuing the cry of the five year old child who has just been told he can't have a cookie until after supper, 'But mommy it's not fair!'

 

Why should wealth be so different. Is beauty evenly distributed? Is talent or intelligence evenly distributed. Speed, strength and stamina are not evenly distributed. Why money? Are you as envious of other people's generosity, kindness or hospitality? Aren't those things more important than money? Why does money that bother you so much when so many people have so much more of so many things that are more valuable than money?
Your focus on money says a great deal about you and none of it is good.

 

Wel if beauty was a commodity and people who had it skewed society so that they get just about every piece of it, of course people would demand it be more evenly distributed.

Got any more stupid comparisons?

 

Sorry, charts without methodology are not evidence. OF COURSE you have read about the "crisis of wealth inequality." There is a massive statist/collectivist gov-edu-union-contractor-grantee-trial lawyer-MSM Complex with a hegemony in public discourse that makes its $$ on higher taxation and redistribution and the vast pools of money that it can corrupt towards its own enrichment as a result. It's no different than any other advertising campaign, "buy more redistributive government with high tax dollars to avert this social crisis!" In this case though, it is completely fraudulent and completely unregulated "advertising." If a private company "advertised" as such, they would be instantly shut down by regulators and the Complex would make dozens of "Evil Bernie Madoff" movies about it. Government gets off scot free with its perpetual frauds.

What you will find is that the methodology for such calculations of "wealth" omits some of the most fundamental categories of it, residential real estate, personal property and most importantly, the vast benefits of technological proliferation that ALL social classes enjoy, and that creates a very healthy kind of "wealth inequality." Here are a couple of videos that expose the scam:




In an unprecedented, highly compressed electricity/information/telecomm/transportation boom unparalleled in human history, the innovators become filthy rich... and they should. For one of thousands of examples, J.P. Morgan was "rich" before creating the infrastructure of consumer home electricity, but after risking everything to do that, became "super rich"... and today everyone... rich and poor... has access to cheap electricity in the home.

The "wealth inequality" scam is mostly focused on financial wealth, abstract stock market gains due to market multiples (PE ratios) that can ONLY exist in reasonable tax regimes and strong property rights. Compare the high, non inflation related multiples in the U.S. market to socialist, collapsing Venezuela for example.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...on-is-so-extreme-it-s-broken-the-stock-market

What you will find is that massive hyperinflation in the unhealthy, socialist Venezuelan economy has caused a hyper spike in stock prices. When the currency is so inflated, the resulting increase in equity prices is relatively meaningless. Yet you could make a case that Venezuela, a highly SOCIALIST country, is suffering from the ills of "wealth inequality" based on its stock market "performance," which would be an absurdity. This is just one example of the folly on relying on financial market multiples to create "wealth inequality" narratives.

There is so much more, but that's enough for now. All you need to know is you are being lied to by government and related fraudsters. There is no crisis of "wealth inequality" any more than there is pervasive racism, sexism, or "hatred." It is just another leftist lie narrative. If they are fooling you, sorry about that. WISE UP!

 

People who willingly enrich the super-rich in a compressed 100 year tech boom unlike any in human history sit back on their inexpensive internet connection that they bought completely voluntarily... that made someone rich... using software they bought completely voluntarily... that made someone rich... typing on cheap hardware... that made someone rich... while a TV with hundreds of channels... that made someone rich... plays statist/leftist programming... that made someone rich in the background. Later on, they may get in their automobile... that made someone rich... and go to a movie with a leftist/statist theme... that made someone rich... and have a meal out... that made someone rich...

... and all the while complain about the "crisis of wealth inequality!"

We, and all levels of "we," are super rich in ways that kings 200 years ago could never dream of. We have ever increasing life expectancy among those who don't live a leisure lifestyle of booze and drugs that wasn't available to anyone in the recent past. In the U.S., our CHILDREN have more purchasing power than most of the world's whole countries. We have huge, whole industries dedicated to serving the working middle class, malls, casual dining, specialty retail, that DIDN'T EVEN EXIST when I was growing up... yet there is some dire ever-increasing "wealth gap."

Our entertainers become billionaires... based on middle class consumption of their wares. Our GAME SHOW HOSTS make $10-70 million dollars a year... based on middle class consumption. Our professional athletes become super rich from not only playing, but lucrative advertising, all derived from middle class purchasing power... yet there is some dire, ever-increasing "wealth gap."

The naivete necessary to buy into gov-edu-union-contractor-grantee-trial lawyer-MSM Complex lie narratives on wealth inequality, in light of the indisputable massive increase in standard of living over even the last 50 years in the U.S. among ALL socioeconomic strata, is astounding. It's as if they want to be fooled, it's THAT stupid.

 

You confuse inequality with equal. Everyone knows equal doesn't work.
Inequality on the other hand can be better without loosing the desire to get ahead.

 

The words you're looking for are equality and uniformity.
Equals need not be uniform. Differences between equals are not necessarily injustices.
Equality works, uniformity does not.

 

What are you trying to say?