The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[YOhio]

An election like this really makes me sad that my vote doesn't count, there are just so many good candidates in both parties. I wish I could vote for all of them!

Lol.

[old_gregg]

An election like this really makes me sad that my vote doesn't count, there are just so many good candidates in both parties. I wish I could vote for all of them!

didn't know you were a felon

[Northwestcoug]

I hear the wealth distribution concern raised by bright people and it baffles me. Why does it matter that a few people are very wealthy? Wealth isn't a zero sum game, and if anything wealth in a free market economy raises the standard of living for all. Just look at the standard of living for those below the poverty line now to those living below the poverty line 60 years ago. The only time wealth distribution becomes a problem is when regulation or monopolization eliminate the potential of free enterprise to enable the average person to become wealthy.

See Snowcat's response below. As to your bolded part, there are vast swaths of the American demographic that never rise out of poverty, let alone become wealthy. Eliminating regulation or preventing monopolization are gross oversimplifications. Intelligent people can debate how much of inherent societal ills can be overcome by the hope of the American dream. But for most poor, wealth distribution (or Snowcat's better term income mobility) are mostly insurmountable issues in the current economy. The fact that a very few people control a lot of wealth wouldn't be a problem per se, if the hope of economic gains was a reality for more people.

Income inequality is the wrong issue. Income mobility should be the area of focus. Unfortunately income mobility is not what we would hope for it to be in the US (the American dream). Recent studies suggest that it is not worse now than in the past (as many seem to perceive), but neither is it better. If income mobility is poor, then income inequality becomes a bigger problem. I want to hear from the candidates their ideas on how we can improve income mobility.

[imanihonjin]

An election like this really makes me sad that my vote doesn't count, there are just so many good candidates in both parties. I wish I could vote for all of them!

No kidding. Life isn't fair I want to vote for Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, the Donald and Senator Cruz.

[Commando]

No kidding. Life isn't fair I want to vote for Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, the Donald and Senator Cruz.

Man this really is a year that a guy named Bush could capture the oval office again. Those candidates ^ are amazingly bad.

[imanihonjin]

See Snowcat's response below. As to your bolded part, there are vast swaths of the American demographic that never rise out of poverty, let alone become wealthy. Eliminating regulation or preventing monopolization are gross oversimplifications. Intelligent people can debate how much of inherent societal ills can be overcome by the hope of the American dream. But for most poor, wealth distribution (or Snowcat's better term income mobility) are mostly insurmountable issues in the current economy. The fact that a very few people control a lot of wealth wouldn't be a problem per se, if the hope of economic gains was a reality for more people.

To me this type of analysis falls short because, so far, you haven't detailed why it is bad that a few people control a lot of wealth (this isn't a zero sum game) or what this has to do with people who are poor and will never had the opportunity to make gains economically ("We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one.").

[Topper]

So what to do these people amassing large sums of money actually do with their money? Do they hide it in a safe in their house or under their mattresses? The vast majority of this money is invested in something or the other (or at the very least in some bank account accruing nominal interest)....or in other words it is being circulated.

But what is happening now, the oligarchs reserve the money for only a few elite projects and make access to capital for the vast majority of entrepreneurs unaffordable or unattainable. If only GM can get access to capital, but start ups and parts companies are denied easy access, the accumulation of wealth is retained within the narrow section of oligarchs or plutarchs.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Did I miss something? Isn't this the platform on which the republican party is built (individuals are better than the government at determining need)? When did BYU71 become a democrat/socialist?

Poor guy gets confused a lot.

[Northwestcoug]

To me this type of analysis falls short because, so far, you haven't detailed why it is bad that a few people control a lot of wealth (this isn't a zero sum game) or what this has to do with people who are poor and will never had the opportunity to make gains economically ("We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one.").

I think it's pretty self-evident. We live in a capitalist country. The way to succeed in almost all aspects of American life is to make money. For many reasons, poor people can't make a lot of money. One of those reasons is that the practical availability of wealth (I keep hearing this zero-sum game issue with wealth; I honestly don't understand the concept) is out of reach for quite a few people. It is at least a part of the problem why a lot of the poor cannot succeed in America.

[imanihonjin]

But what is happening now, the oligarchs reserve the money for only a few elite projects and make access to capital for the vast majority of entrepreneurs unaffordable or unattainable. If only GM can get access to capital, but start ups and parts companies are denied easy access, the accumulation of wealth is retained within the narrow section of oligarchs or plutarchs.

What is GM going to do with that capital? They are going to use it to make more cars, order more parts, hire more employees, etc, etc.

[imanihonjin]

I think it's pretty self-evident. We live in a capitalist country. The way to succeed in almost all aspects of American life is to make money. For many reasons, poor people can't make a lot of money. One of those reasons is that the practical availability of wealth (I keep hearing this zero-sum game issue with wealth; I honestly don't understand the concept) is out of reach for quite a few people. It is at least a part of the problem why a lot of the poor cannot succeed in America.

What you haven't explained though is why some people having a lot of money keeps these other people from being able to attain wealth. The zero sum concept is simply that there isn't a fixed amount of money in the economy. An example of a zero sum game was given in the quote in parenthetical.

[All-American]

OK, sorry. Good smart ass answer on your part.

Anyone have anything of more substance as to where he is going to get the money?

That really is his answer. The wealthy will pay for it. I believe those were his exact words with respect to, for example, how he would make college free for everybody.

[snowcat]

I think it's pretty self-evident. We live in a capitalist country. The way to succeed in almost all aspects of American life is to make money. For many reasons, poor people can't make a lot of money. One of those reasons is that the practical availability of wealth (I keep hearing this zero-sum game issue with wealth; I honestly don't understand the concept) is out of reach for quite a few people. It is at least a part of the problem why a lot of the poor cannot succeed in America.

This is why I choose to support micro financing as part of my charitable giving (charitable as defined by me, loans I help finance are not tax deductible). If I can do a tiny bit to help someone move out of poverty, I will have done something important. I invite all here to join me, we can start a CS group.

www.kiva.org

[Topper]

What is GM going to do with that capital? They are going to use it to make more cars, order more parts, hire more employees, etc, etc.

Or simply use the money to pay out to institutional investors and to reward CEO with huge bonuses even when the stock is doing poorly. It is not true that the blue ribbon plutarchs use money in a fashion that "trickles" down. The plutarchs keep it in the family. I am arguing for a method than helps it circulate better without government intervention. We need small business loan incentives, more than is currently being done.

[Topper]

This is why I choose to support micro financing as part of my charitable giving (charitable as defined by me, loans I help finance are not tax deductible). If I can do a tiny bit to help someone move out of poverty, I will have done something important. I invite all here to join me, we can start a CS group.

www.kiva.org

Not being in your income class, I can't say my contributions matter, so my participation along these lines has been minimal. I participated in "coffee" bikes in Rwanda. It seems to offer many poor people a way out of poverty.