I've slowly come around to believing in "maximum wealth"

afterlife2009

Superstar
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
4,818
Reputation
1,100
Daps
17,668
but if any democratic nominee starts talking this type of nonsense, I rather republicans keep control of the White House.
yeah cause you work for a bank lol. mediocre ass employee bootlicking like this :hhh: disgusting. ol "I got mines fukk yall"

Only good thing is now I don't have to worry about the extreme left trying to break up these Banks that I work for.
 

Ya' Cousin Cleon

OG COUCH CORNER HUSTLA
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
24,285
Reputation
-1,530
Daps
82,063
Reppin
Harvey World to Dallas, TX
:russ::russ::russ:

meanwhile third way politics by democrats is literally how we got trump in the first place

but of course

always look down on the people who want free healthcare and education and for police to stop shooting black people as if they're the "extreme"




He is a moderate democrat with the best chance, I believe, to defeat Trump in 2020.




I don't know the real economic term, but I mean the concept of putting a cap on how much people can own, then tax the shyt out of anything over that limit. We got billionaires with so much money they're out buying stupid stuff. Who the fukk needs a yacht that looks like a damned US Navy destroyer???

http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.cnn.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F190307113718-dubai-superyachts-7.jpg

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/superyachts-dubai-international-boat-show-2019/index.html

I used to always think there was a practical limit to how much you could spend; you can only buy so many houses that you'll ever spend time in, drive so many cars, wear so many Rolexes, etc. But the mega rich will FIND a way to flaunt no matter how much you give them.
 

Ya' Cousin Cleon

OG COUCH CORNER HUSTLA
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
24,285
Reputation
-1,530
Daps
82,063
Reppin
Harvey World to Dallas, TX
chances are you don't come from extreme wealth, so how are you gonna be a billionaire?


tenor.gif

I'm trying to get this money and one day be a billionaire myself. Since I was 18, every year I've made more money than the last and now that I'm repping #DEEPSIX (Deep six figures gang) :gucci:you brehs wanna change all the rules and tax the hell out of the rich ........









GrotesqueComplexAffenpinscher-max-1mb.gif
 

Shogun

Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
25,568
Reputation
6,037
Daps
63,234
Reppin
Knicks
It's worth pointing out that "Our World in Data" is produced by a single guy with a pretty strong agenda, and that graphs like that come with some assumptions and generalizations that I believe are invalid.

The "extreme poverty" stats are distorted because they're almost always based entirely on money flow. That means that in large part they're just measuring the rural-to-urban transition, not people's actual wealth and well-being.

They'll have a family living on a farm in the countryside as living in "extreme poverty" because they have less than $1 cash flow a day, even though they own their land, produce their own food, and generally have access to healthy air, water, etc.

Now have that same family lose their land to agribusiness and get forced to move into an urban slum. They live in a 8 foot by 8 foot room that they don't even own, they work far longer hours under far more stress, their air quality is shyt, their water is unclean, for food they're now mostly eating processed corporate crap. But since they're living on wages their daily income is $3/day so they're marked as "not extreme poverty" even though quality of life has cratered.

We keep monetizing tons of things that everyone used to take for granted, but the mere monetization of life doesn't mean an improvement in life.
Any comment on the Georgetown paper I also linked? I mean, you can discredit the one chart but there's plenty of evidence that standards of living have increased globally since the widespread adoption of capitalism. If you want to discount death by infectious disease, access to food and sanitary living conditions, access to literacy and education as simply the monetization of life I'd disagree.

The well-being argument is a different one, and one that I agree with. For the entirety of human history religion provided that meaning. I don't suspect you see that as a desirable answer, though...so what is?
 

ezrathegreat

Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
9,753
Reputation
5,035
Daps
65,034
chances are you don't come from extreme wealth, so how are you gonna be a billionaire?

:yeshrug:By investments. I've heavily invested in a couple of apps that are starting to gain traction, if any of them hit it big I'm going to pulling in NBA numbers. Not to mention the CBD oil business my cousin started. After that I can start buying more property in Nigeria and West Africa and expand my real estate portfolio. I'm trying to build an empire, brick by brick.
 

Ya' Cousin Cleon

OG COUCH CORNER HUSTLA
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
24,285
Reputation
-1,530
Daps
82,063
Reppin
Harvey World to Dallas, TX
:yeshrug:well, good luck to you

hope any property you buy in Nigeria or West African doesn't result in natives around you being uprooted, but I doubt it.
:yeshrug:By investments. I've heavily invested in a couple of apps that are starting to gain traction, if any of them hit it big I'm going to pulling in NBA numbers. Not to mention the CBD oil business my cousin started. After that I can start buying more property in Nigeria and West Africa and expand my real estate portfolio. I'm trying to build an empire, brick by brick.
 
Last edited:

re'up

Veteran
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
21,237
Reputation
6,563
Daps
66,904
Reppin
San Diego
It's a difficult question in some ways, but limit do you set? Is it not the nature of all of us to want more, to want to go to a 2 Michelin star after you've been to a 1? To wear Dolce & Gabbana, when you used to be thrilled with a pair of Reeboks? To live in a high rise, when you used to live in a cramped studio? Where is the limit? How and do you set a limit on ambition, the most entrenched of America's ideals? Where do you set it?

Most of us won't see hundreds of millions in wealth, and I don't mind that people do, but I think at a certain limit, the money should be spent to better the lives of others, who are without, not just a select few, or your immediate family. I feel guilty to have my little scraps when so many can't pay rent.

I am always curious when those who have so much, seem to double down, again, and again, to do the same thing (make money), and rarely turn their attention outward? Our culture is from birth wired like this, it's just so uneven that many can never even pursue lofty ambitions, and instead use that resource to survive day after day, in a system that is essentially draining them, if not breaking them entirely.

When someone buys a 238 million condo, that is way past wrong, and way above the limit, but you can't have people not aspire for more, or I'd still be trapping in front of a taco shop, eating carne asada fries.
 
Last edited:

BoBurnz

Superstar
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
3,499
Reputation
800
Daps
16,171
My first and only choice is Joe Biden(As I have stated all along, and i will never pull the lever for Trump), but if any democratic nominee starts talking this type of nonsense, I rather republicans keep control of the White House.

You far left liberals disgust me and I’m not ashamed to admit that.
Joe Biden :russ:

Vote for a man who opened up all the loopholes that you claim to hate and authored the criminal justice reform act and remains proud of that shyt to this day brehs.

Support a man who believed segregation is a good thing brehs.

Think a man who's a walking sexual assault claim is literally different in any meaningful manner than Donald J Trump brehs.

Joe Biden is one of the PRINCIPLE causes of the staggering increase in income inequality, the wage gap, the disparity between white and black income levels, and has been a key player in keeping the American state trapped in the 1970's since he came into any sort of position of power.

That's how I know you've done literally no research on anything you portend is important. Ten minutes reading up on Joe Biden and his profoundly awful legislative history will tell you all you need to know as to why your position is laughable.

Edit: Oh you work in banking, no wonder you like Biden, he's your toxic industry's best buddy.
 

BoBurnz

Superstar
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
3,499
Reputation
800
Daps
16,171
It's a difficult question in some ways, but limit do you set? Is it not the nature of all of us to want more, to want to go to a 2 Michelin star after you've been to a 1? To wear Dolce & Gabbana, when you used to be thrilled with a pair of Reeboks? To live in a high rise, when you used to live in a cramped studio? Where is the limit? How and do you set a limit on ambition, the most entrenched of America's ideals? Where do you set it?

Most of us won't see hundreds of millions in wealth, and I don't mind that people do, but I think at a certain limit, the money should be spent to better the lives of others, who are without, not just a select few, or your immediate family. I feel guilty to have my little scraps when so many can't pay rent.

I am always curious when those who have so much, seem to double down, again, and again, to do the same thing (make money), and rarely turn their attention outward? Our culture is from birth wired like this, it's just so uneven that many can never even pursue lofty ambitions, and instead use that resource to survive day after day, in a system that is essentially draining them, if not breaking them entirely.

When someone buys a 238 million condo, that is way past wrong, and way above the limit, but you can't have people not aspire for more, or I'd still be trapping in front of a taco shop, eating carne asada fries.
The idea that we need the nebulous ideal to chase after more because that's the only way to inspire human aspirations is absurd. People don't just go out to find meaning because of the lie, yes, the lie, we tell them that if they try hard enough one day they'll all be rich.

People find meaning in lots of areas, making it so they don't need to chase after that absurd lie in order to feel secure so that they can do what they ACTUALLY want to do isn't a healthy model to build off a society. Aspirations shouldn't be based on the idea of living, they should be based on the ideals of what makes people fulfilled and gives their lives meaning.

Hyper wealth doesn't give people aspirations, it gives them a delusion that they'll win the lottery.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,930
Daps
204,091
Reppin
the ether
Any comment on the Georgetown paper I also linked? I mean, you can discredit the one chart but there's plenty of evidence that standards of living have increased globally since the widespread adoption of capitalism. If you want to discount death by infectious disease, access to food and sanitary living conditions, access to literacy and education as simply the monetization of life I'd disagree.

What's the argument you're trying to make?

"We don't want to go back to feudalism or plantation slavery."

"Tyrannical kings with absolute power often abused their population."

"Modern advances in health care are often positive."

Well sure, I'll vouch for all of those. :heh:

No one doubts that some good things have happened in the last few centuries. And? If you're going to use that as an argument for unregulated capitalism being a positive force in the world, then you could say the same thing about the globalization of White Supremacy or the wanton destruction of the environment. "Sure, they hurt some people, but look at all the health care advances we've made since White people started taking over the world and destroying every ecosystem!"

The problem with Max Roser, Steven Pinker, Peter Diamandis, and the rest of the "the world is only getting better!!!" crowd is that they are almost universally wealthy white technocrats whose entire experience of global poverty and serious environmental issues is via statistics. They neither know what people's actual experience is like nor do they understand the instability of their current models. They're like the bankers before the economic collapse - as long as things are going well for them they believe that everything will always keep going well and thus use cognitive dissonance to ignore both the people who are getting screwed as well as the unsustainability of the current system.

Where are Roser's numbers showing slum growth? Where are Roser's numbers showing the self-reporting of quality of life? Depression rates? Mental illness? Where are Roser's numbers showing the increasing control of all wealth by the rich? Where are Roser's numbers showing the steady collapse of wildlife populations, from insects to fisheries to large carnivores? Where are Roser's numbers showing the loss of arable land? Where are Roser's numbers showing decreasing soil fertility? Where are Roser's numbers showing the growing pollution of our waterways?

Even those pro-democracy stats - that was the trend for a couple centuries, do you really think it's still true now? From Trump to Sen to Duterte to al-Sisi to Kim to Putin to Bolsonaro to Maduro to Prayut...are we really trending towards more citizen control right now? What about the argument that the same technology these guys loves appears to favor tyranny, and they don't even need to get rid of "democracy" to do it?

I'm a big advocate of science and statistics, but there are ways to do it blind to reality. People who promote economic growth and technological salvation without real experience of the lives of the poor and the quality of the environment are missing the entire picture.



The well-being argument is a different one, and one that I agree with. For the entirety of human history religion provided that meaning. I don't suspect you see that as a desirable answer, though...so what is?
I'm a deeply faithful Christian. Coming to follow Jesus saved my life.

I believe that a connection to God, a connection to one's local community, and a connection to nature are all essential aspects of well-being. The neoliberal ideal is to destroy all three of those things in favor of secularization, globalization, and technophiliia. I profoundly reject that bullshyt.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,930
Daps
204,091
Reppin
the ether
I cant co-sign this. Just tax everyone at 35% (32% state/fed, and allow citizens to select where their additional 3 percent goes (schools, first responders, roads), no write offs.

In that system, what would keep the wealthy from constantly accumulating wealth until they control virtually all of it?

Every part of our system is designed to make the wealthy wealthier and the poor poorer.

1. The wealthy profit off of loans, the poor are impoverished from loans.

2. The wealthy profit off of rents, the poor are impoverished from rents.

3. The wealthy profit off of underpaying wages, the poor are impoverished from low wages.

4. The wealthy get the best education so they get further ahead, the poor get the worst education so they get further behind.

5. The wealthy profit off of lawyers, prisons, and the legal system in general, the poor are impoverished by the same.

If you tax everyone's income at the same rate, you're doing absolutely zilch to correct for all those inherent biases towards wealth. And in a capitalist system, the biases are such that without any correction, a very small group of people will eventually control all of the wealth.
 
Top