America is not broke...

How is that a problem? Isn't Gates a citizen of the world (as we all are )? Don't his overseas investments improve the standard of living in those countries so that they are less likely to invade us? Originally Posted by pjorourke

So now you're defending excessively uneven wealth distribution by suggesting that excessively uneven wealth distribution helps prevent excessively uneven wealth distribution....which all goes towards preventing problems that would be caused by excessively uneven wealth distribution.

And now my head hurts.

Of course, you'll deny that you said this, just like you denied saying other things that disagreed with your own ideology.

155 million people each own the equivalent of a 6 year old car. Originally Posted by Doove

Well considering that they have an average net worth that is about 1000x the bottom half of most off the world, how is that a problem. You didn't answer my question in post #25. Would things be any different if they each had the equivalent of say a brand new Mercedes.

Yes, i think there would be a difference if the gap was smaller. It used to be substantially smaller and I think the US as a country was better off for it. There was more opportunity for the disadvantaged economically to succeed then there is today, IMO. Now, that may not matter to you which would make the issue moot.

ps PJ the notion that another country would invade us is laughable, unless you mean with illegal immigrants.

Would things be any different if they each had the equivalent of say a brand new Mercedes. Originally Posted by pjorourke

155 million people with greater buying power. Gee, let me think.....

unless you mean with illegal immigrants. Originally Posted by discreetgent

Which of course contributes to those "destitute" 155 million.

Yes, i think there would be a difference if the gap was smaller. Originally Posted by discreetgent

No, the gap I hypothesized was the same relative difference. If the top .0001% have $2B now and the bottom half have $5K, I was suggesting $40B and $100,000 or $400B and $1million. See, I'm trying to find out if its an absolute level of income that makes a difference or the relative difference. You know how depressed those millionaires get when they have to hang around with billionaires.

interesting discussion. .

Which of course contributes to those "destitute" 155 million. Originally Posted by pjorourke

They are only about 8% of those 155 million.

interesting discussion. . Originally Posted by johnnybax

Yup. Fairly standard give and take, fairly standard topic in D&T

Nobody has answered my question. Is it the absolute level of income or relative thats a problem.

There are people that create, innovate and add value to society. Then there are takers. We have created a society that lets the former thrive; but we are in danger of letting the latter and people that believe that they are smarter than everyone else somehow believe that the creators of wealth are evil and we should be entitled to take their wealth away.

I have a little brother like that, and I have tried to help as best I can But there comes a point that I have to say no, you are not entitled to my stuff. I may give you some of my stuff freely because I have hope that you might turn things around, but you can't demand it and take what I have just because you need it or think I got lucky.

Hey, I here there Venezuela is turning itself into a pure socialistic state (with a dictator but you can see all the Sean Penn movies you want on the buss station TVs

Hey, I here there Venezuela is turning itself into a pure socialistic state (with a dictator but you can see all the Sean Penn movies you want on the buss station TVs Originally Posted by oden

Red herring alert. When the topic becomes uncomfortable change it.

Nobody has answered my question. Is it the absolute level of income or relative thats a problem. Originally Posted by pjorourke

I think relative is where its at. My reasoning is that if the top had 400B and the 155 had 1M (I think that is what your numbers were) we would simply be in a situation where the cost of living was much higher. So that Mercedes would now cost 20x or 200x as much as well.

No, my premise was that there was no change in purchasing power.

No, my premise was that there was no change in purchasing power. Originally Posted by pjorourke

I claim that premise is unrealistic.