InvisibleBlack
Posts: 865
Joined: 7/24/2009 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: subfever I didn't want to initiate a hijack to another thread in this forum, so I decided to create a new thread. quote:
...This is part of why you cannot just "soak the rich". They're smarter and better connected than the people trying to "soak" them. They leave... Do you really think so? Yeah, more or less. The history of the modern era seems rife with a creation of huge family fortunes and dynasties that survive without ever being broken up. And somehow they all end up being politically connected. People always cry for "reform" and "equity" but somehow, even after the country's gone into debt and business has fled and everyone's out of work from all the "reform", the few elite rich are still elite and rich, and somehow stay in power. This isn't unique to the United States. It's happened before and will doubtless happen again. quote:
ORIGINAL: subfever First of all, just who is it that you think is trying to soak them? The little guys? Or maybe you are caught up in the left vs right paradigm, and believe that the Democrat politicians genuinely represent the little guys? I don't think that anyone genuinely represents the little guy - well, anyone currently in a major political party. The number of the established rich and wealthy insiders on the Democratic side of the aisle is at least as big as those on the Republican side. I generally try not to view things from a left-right paradigm and more from a "how does this work as a system" model. Not that I can claim that my models of our economic and political systems are accurate. They're works in progress. I think there's a large "soak the rich" sentiment in this country. You can see it in the opinions of many posters on these boards. I think a lot of political figures get themselves into power by playing on these attitudes. quote:
ORIGINAL: subfever And if the "soaked rich" are so smart and well-connected, wouldn't they be able to avoid getting soaked in the first place? This is my entire point. quote:
ORIGINAL: subfever What's your definition of rich? It's often subjective and relative to one's own status. I've asked this question to others a lot, myself. From my end of things, I would suppose that one is "rich" if one has better than a million dollars in income a year and/or better than 10 million in fairly liquid assets and one is "super rich" if one has better than 100 million in assets. quote:
ORIGINAL: subfever The truly elite ruling-class have a million chips each. Poverty and lower middle-class have 0 and 1 chip each. The average joe middle-class has 2 to 3 chips each. Upper middle class has 4 or 5 chips each. What the average middle class typically considers as "wealthy" has 6 to 10 chips each... It's the million-chip players' game that we are all playing, and it always has been... The million chip players are the source of our problems. I agree with your thesis, more or less. The million chip players have enough influence, connections and outright political power that they will get themselves exempted from any laws designed to hurt them. Those laws never seem to actually dent, break up or hurt the big family dynasties or fortunes. They do, however, crush the 4-5 or 6-10 chip players. I don't think the problem in our society is the upper middle-class or the lower-upper class or whatever you want to call them. The problem is the exactly the million-chip players, whether they're viewed as left-wing or right-wing. My point is that you're not going to "get" them by passing a higher tax on the upper brackets or by "regulating" their industry. They'll get around that. They always have. I think there's a lot more mileage, for the country as a whole, to worry more about how to enable the little guy to do better and to encourange the not-so-little guy to do more than there is to try and take from the "rich". quote:
ORIGINAL: subfever This is my last post of 2009. I know my views fall on blind eyes and deaf ears for the most part, primarily because it conflicts with everything we've been taught to believe. Nevertheless, I hope it makes some sense to some of you, and truly connects with someone out there... for I'm 100% convinced that we are living in a woefully indoctrinated society that's going in the wrong direction. May your upcoming new year be all that you wish it to be. All the best in the New Year. [Edited for typos and hangover-related issues.]
< Message edited by InvisibleBlack -- 1/1/2010 1:41:57 PM >
_____________________________
Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that, I'll be over here, looking through your stuff.
|