quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
And yet, more people became millionaires in the US during and in the aftermath of the Great Depression than any other time..

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dom4subssub4doms

according to the federal reserve the top 1 percent inherited 10 percent of the nations wealth.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
And yet, more people became millionaires in the US during and in the aftermath of the Great Depression than any other time..

Yep, but the day was saved by social democracy. Greed was modified just enough, and just in the nick of time, for the system to carry on. Well, in the USA and the UK, if not in Germany, where economic poverty and general humiliation contributed to the rise of the Nazis, re-militarisation and, eventually, the Second World War. This event screwed up the world economic situation somewhat, and there was a consensus afterwards to avoid it if at all possible.

What flabbergasts me about the world economic situation right now is the fact that people are *still* talking in terms of what is, and is not, 'morally right'. It's moving to a point where that is becoming irrelevant.

Re an example on this thread: It may not matter, soon, whether a company in Greece, for instance, has 'all moral and legal rights' to a piece of land and what's grown on it because that company has bought it and owns it. If a mass of unemployed and penniless Greeks get too hungry and combine to take that land and all the profits therefrom, they will go right ahead, then claim that it was always rightfully theirs in the first place. They will simply arrange their ethical arguments to 'fit' with their needs and won't give a damn if other Greeks, never mind the rest of the world, don't agree with their reasoning. The Greek government may want to send in its armed forces . . . but that will only be possible if said government can still afford to run armed forces whose soldiers are are equipped enough, and paid enough, to do the job.

You see where this is going? It'd be foolish to think that this world economic situation is going to carry on just being about 'who has the most righteous argument'. That's beginning to look like a lot of gentle bickering between people who still think that they're living in the the relatively contented times of the past.

quote:

so? how long will they have that? there is a saying "shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations"..

quote:

ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl

France has elected a new president. Since he's a socialist, I doubt he'll make anything worse. Things may get even better if that's possible.

United States:

outrageous college tuition, sick people dying slow painful deaths because of lack of health care (let them die, I don't want to pay for anyone else's health care I want my freedom it's all about me me me me), executions that can't be reversed if they find out the person was innocent, only partial salary if injured, working long hours, tax dollars spent on policing the world

France:

no college tuition, everyone gets health care, no death penalty, full pay while off work if injured, work less hours, stay out of wars that don't concern them and spend their tax dollars on their own people

I'm not sure why so many Americans hate the French. Perhaps because they're better than us?

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The people of France will now get the government that they voted in. Now they will have to pay for it..

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Is that when we boycotted french fries ?

quote:

I never understood the EU anyway. After Germany had to absorb the crappy economy of East Germany after reunification, I'm stunned they fell for the same thing twice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

If France goes the way of Greece, will you guys finally admit progressive policies don't work? I'll admit they work, if France figures it out in time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

so? how long will they have that? there is a saying "shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations"..

Just another way of saying " a fool and his money are soon parted" Did you mean to imply that all or even most of those who rise from the status of the not rich to that of rich will never maintin their place there because they are "shirtsleves"?
I have often hard that if all of the rich peoples money were given to the poor the rich would have it back in a generation or two...when in the history of the world has that happened. The wealth was redistributed in russia and cuba and the aristocracy has not reclaimed what they claim to be their right. So far it has been nearly five generations for russia and nearly three for cuba.
Bill gates was hardly from the not rich class. His family was quite well off. He through his, illegal acvtivities, became richer.
Buffet was the son of a four term u.s. congressman...hardly an impoverished family.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

so? how long will they have that? there is a saying "shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations"..

Just another way of saying " a fool and his money are soon parted" Did you mean to imply that all or even most of those who rise from the status of the not rich to that of rich will never maintin their place there because they are "shirtsleves"?
I have often hard that if all of the rich peoples money were given to the poor the rich would have it back in a generation or two...when in the history of the world has that happened. The wealth was redistributed in russia and cuba and the aristocracy has not reclaimed what they claim to be their right. So far it has been nearly five generations for russia and nearly three for cuba.
Bill gates was hardly from the not rich class. His family was quite well off. He through his, illegal acvtivities, became richer.
Buffet was the son of a four term u.s. congressman...hardly an impoverished family.

No.. It means what i have been saying, the first generation is dirt poor and works hard,

Do you consider buffet and gates to be first or second generation? Both of their parents were rich.



invest, struggle, and eventually become rich and then usually the third generation has no work ethic and just blows the whole lot and ends up poor again, sometimes that happens in the second generation..

I would like some sort of validation for this opinion


My ex's family, due to his grandfathers hard work and building up a successful business and his grandmother investing in good real estate, they would have been considered very well off, i guess the 1% of their day.. the second generation blew it all.. they were inept at business

Why was that? Why were they not educated by their parents to be more astute or to hire astute people?



and squandered the money.. including his mother.. she died in subsidized housing living off her govt pension..

The thing about the rich losing it all and getting it back, imo, is true, but its only true for those people that have the ability to earn it themselves, that doesnt necessarily pass thru to future generations cuz its the drive and knowledge that creates the wealth.. So what that means is that if Buffett screwed up somehow and lost his fortune today, (assuming he wasnt too old to start over), he would have the knowledge to create wealth again.. he likely would do it in less time too, imo..

If this were true you should be able to cite numerous examples of this.

So Gates and Buffett didnt grow up on welfare, that doesnt mean to me that the were born with a silver spoon in their mouth either

Perhaps if you were to do a little research you might be able to disabuse yourself of your ignorance concernin the background of these two families.


and that they both didnt work hard, learn and that they didnt earn their wealth.

If it were true that they worked hard you should be able to cite what sort of work they did to "earn" what they have.


I believe Buffett worked even as a kid..

If you read his bio you will notice that what he did as a kid had nothing to do with how he made his money. He made his money based on the expensive education he got as a result of his not poor family.

And yes, both Gates and Buffett have done unethical and sleazy things (which imo, diminishes their accomplishments)... yet many people think of them as generous and god-like.. Say anything negative about Buffett here and watch how some posters defend him just cuz he brags about only paying 17% tax and his humble secretary pays a much higher rate,.. I give him credit for having the media eat out of his hands tho.. master media manipulator is he...

I pay no income tax and have not for almost 50 years. What has that to do with anything?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
And yet, more people became millionaires in the US during and in the aftermath of the Great Depression than any other time..

Yep, but the day was saved by social democracy. Greed was modified just enough, and just in the nick of time, for the system to carry on. Well, in the USA and the UK, if not in Germany, where economic poverty and general humiliation contributed to the rise of the Nazis, re-militarisation and, eventually, the Second World War. This event screwed up the world economic situation somewhat, and there was a consensus afterwards to avoid it if at all possible.

quote:

What flabbergasts me about the world economic situation right now is the fact that people are *still* talking in terms of what is, and is not, 'morally right'. It's moving to a point where that is becoming irrelevant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dom4subssub4doms

according to the federal reserve the top 1 percent inherited 10 percent of the nations wealth.

so? how long will they have that? there is a saying "shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations"..

Neither Buffett or Gates inherited their wealth, I wonder what percentage of the nations wealth they own.. Regardless, 10% of the nations wealth as inherited is only 1/4 of all the wealth owned by the 1%.. so 3/4 of the wealth was earned.. (based on them owning 42%)

"According to a study of Federal Reserve data conducted by NYU professor Edward Wolff, for the nation’s richest 1%, inherited wealth accounted for only 9% of their net worth in 2001, down from 23% in 1989"
A study by Spectrem Group[image][/image] found that among today’s millionaires, inherited wealth accounted for just 2% of their total sources of wealth.
http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/01/14/the-decline-of-inherited-money/

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

Its late and i dont have the time or inclination to go further into this, what i have stated is my opinion and thats not going to change.. you believe whatever you want..

and as far as you not paying any income tax for 50 years.. lots of homeless and poor dont either...

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The people of France will now get the government that they voted in. Now they will have to pay for it..

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

The "richies" you are refering to are not rich in any sense of the word. How many kennedy's,rockafellas,duponts,fords,firestones,folgers etc fit your characterazation of the rich. Their welth is institutionalized which is what gates,buffet and walton have done with their wealth. A "charatible foundation" is just a scam to employ all of your cronies and keep your money away from the tax man.

I dont disagree with that, i think those charities are a huge scam but regardless, its kept out of the hands of the kids.. Paris Hilton aint getting much if anything from her grandaddy.. she has had to work for her millions... yes, i know some people would not call what she does as "work"..