Rich People Don't Create Jobs

[byu71]

Someone gave you a false description of Common Core.

Dang them.

[Moliere]

Wo, wo. I actually heard on the radio that educators need to ask a student why they think 2+2=5 before saying they are wrong. If they have a good reason as to why the number they came up with is 5, then you are supposed to tell them they are right. Something to do with the education "core" that is being adopted.

Makes sense. Why would we want to hurt a students feelings if we don't need to?

[Moliere]

Interesting that the map shows that where most corporate headquarters are, or where most of the wealth is have the 7 deadly sins? (Or where those guys retire to...) Is that what you meant? Actually, that doesn't surprise me at all. It seems that is what one would expect. Midwesterns aren't the one's profiting off of fracking, but the guys in some of those areas with those sins are.

Midwesterners are doing very well off of fracking. But I guess you are more concerned that administration type people like myself (accountant in Houston) are also gainfully employed thanks to the fracking going on up in Pennsylvania and ND right? Odd that you'd have issues with me making money given that my job can be done either in ND or in Houston or in Manila. Someone has to do the administrative work and it only makes sense to have it handled in a central location. I can't imagine anyone, ever thinking that having separate management and administration for every single oil lease (or even state) would be a good idea.

[byu71]

Bravisimo

[woot]

They missed a negative sign in the penultimate step. This is a case where asking the student why they got the wrong answer really is more fruitful though.

[byu71]

They missed a negative sign in the penultimate step. This is a case where asking the student why they got the wrong answer really is more fruitful though.

I think you have a good point. I always aced questions on tests that I had missed on a quiz earlier.

There is a difference though in asking the student why they gotten the question WRONG as opposed to asking the student why their answer is CORRECT.

[VirginiaCougar]

Looks like the economic model of unfettered Laissez-Faire capitalism, the type without any strong rules to the road. An ideology deeply embedded in double-think (where 2+2=5 has an interesting meaning.)

[byu71]

Looks like the economic model of unfettered Laissez-Faire capitalism, the type without any strong rules to the road. An ideology deeply embedded in double-think (where 2+2=5 has an interesting meaning.)

With some Corporate CEO's making so many mistakes. With some government beaurocrats making so many mistakes. Why would you not want a Capitalistic system diversified and unfettered as much as possible? The more you centralize the power the more you take the chance on ending up with "the some" crowd gaining a lot of power and really messing things up.

Two examples. The big banks. President Barak Obama, Harry Reid and Nanci Pelosi.

[USUC]

Looks like the economic model of unfettered Laissez-Faire capitalism, the type without any strong rules to the road. An ideology deeply embedded in double-think (where 2+2=5 has an interesting meaning.)

If free market capitalism doesn't have any strong rules to the road, why would they have an economic model that looks like that? Pssh.

[imanihonjin]

Looks like the economic model of unfettered Laissez-Faire capitalism, the type without any strong rules to the road. An ideology deeply embedded in double-think (where 2+2=5 has an interesting meaning.)

You really have no idea how capitalism works, do you?

[Uncle Ted]

They missed a negative sign in the penultimate step. This is a case where asking the student why they got the wrong answer really is more fruitful though.

I guess this is correct, however, according to the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

[Omaha 680]

Looks like the economic model of unfettered Laissez-Faire capitalism, the type without any strong rules to the road. An ideology deeply embedded in double-think (where 2+2=5 has an interesting meaning.)

Please re-read The Road to Serfdom. Clearly defined rules of the road are essential to capitalism functioning.

[VirginiaCougar]

Please re-read The Road to Serfdom. Clearly defined rules of the road are essential to capitalism functioning. You are the king of economic strawmen.

I've read it a few times, interesting book. Don't agree with everything in it, but there you go. So you are accepting strong rules to the road? That would be a huge step forward for many on this discussion. That fact makes it far removed from a strawman argument. Excessive inequality may just be a necessary strong rule. You can't have some people driving 150 mph in limited edition European sportscars while others go 20 in a clunky old 40 year old car. It may cause excessive danger to both types of drivers.

I would argue that one of many (not by far my only concern) with excessive inequality in a market system is how it promotes and establishes dangerous rent-seeking. One of countless examples would be "Citizens United" (it has nothing to do with citizens and certainly not uniting them) and the resulting fact that the vast majority of SuperPAC funding which drove our Billions in campaign spending came from just 200 super-wealthy individuals. We've actually surpassed the Guilded Age on inequality and are facing equally troublesome problems.

Personally, I think its time for another Teddy Roosevelt - a good Republican who in many ways restored Constitutional values with his "New Nationalism" (and one of my favorite presidents). I realize that one might tweak a few folks, but I am a big fan.

[byu71]

Personally, I think its time for another Teddy Roosevelt - a good Republican who in many ways restored Constitutional values with his "New Nationalism" (and one of my favorite presidents). I realize that one might tweak a few folks, but I am a big fan.

I know many are fans of government intervention to bring about more income and or asset equality. I would say the government intervention compounds the problem and it doesn't matter which party is in power.

If the government would have stayed our of the way and not done the big stimulus, the market place would have made adjustments to the inequality gap. Think of all the people that should have lost all their assets who are still multi-multi millionaires due to the government bailout. They didn't have to pay a big price for their bonehead moves.

[imanihonjin]

I've read it a few times, interesting book. Don't agree with everything in it, but there you go. So you are accepting strong rules to the road? That would be a huge step forward for many on this discussion. That fact makes it far removed from a strawman argument. Excessive inequality may just be a necessary strong rule. You can't have some people driving 150 mph in limited edition European sportscars while others go 20 in a clunky old 40 year old car. It may cause excessive danger to both types of drivers.

I would argue that one of many (not by far my only concern) with excessive inequality in a market system is how it promotes and establishes dangerous rent-seeking. One of countless examples would be "Citizens United" (it has nothing to do with citizens and certainly not uniting them) and the resulting fact that the vast majority of SuperPAC funding which drove our Billions in campaign spending came from just 200 super-wealthy individuals. We've actually surpassed the Guilded Age on inequality and are facing equally troublesome problems.

Personally, I think its time for another Teddy Roosevelt - a good Republican who in many ways restored Constitutional values with his "New Nationalism" (and one of my favorite presidents). I realize that one might tweak a few folks, but I am a big fan.

You constantly talk about the inequality in the market system and the income gap between the rich and the poor as if in America it is the same people and their families who are always on the top and the same people and their families who are always on the bottom. Yet the picture you paint and the reality of America are two different things. People come from no where and poverty stricken backgrounds to become the top 1% of the the 1% and others who were in the 1% have made horrible business decisions to become completely broke.

You never ever account for movement between classes in America. It is the mobility between classes that makes America great. The reality of the situation is that the American dream is still alive. I am a product of that dream. I came from extremely humble means. My father never accepted government hand outs because of his belief on self sufficiency, however, we would have qualified for them all. I am no 71' or Warren Buffet but I have done well financially and have a very comfortable life. Mobility between classes, which again you continue to ignore, is still well and alive and therefore, so is the American Dream.

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/b...-affluence.ece