[mattduke]

What's amusing is watching a poor person win the lottery, only to squander it within a couple years.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mattduke', 'W')hat's amusing is watching a poor person win the lottery, only to squander it within a couple years.

[mattduke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mattduke', 'W')hat's amusing is watching a poor person win the lottery, only to squander it within a couple years.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mattduke', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mattduke', 'W')hat's amusing is watching a poor person win the lottery, only to squander it within a couple years.

[mattduke]

You can buy a 1oz silver eagle for $20.

[RedStateGreen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bman4k1', '
')Coming from presonal experience of being dirt poor, I know what its like, I dont enjoy the feeling. I worked hard to not be poor (I was born in poverty, went to Unviversity got a job) I will do whatever it takes to have a sustainable peacefull life out of poverty.

[Bman4k1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RedStateGreen', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bman4k1', '
')Coming from presonal experience of being dirt poor, I know what its like, I dont enjoy the feeling. I worked hard to not be poor (I was born in poverty, went to Unviversity got a job) I will do whatever it takes to have a sustainable peacefull life out of poverty.

[kellan1776]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pretorian', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kellan1776', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joeltrout', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Novus', ' ')Money is the root of all evil.

[kellan1776]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('zensui', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kellan1776', '(')...)
The vitriol displayed in this post and many other posts in these forums is beyond belief. There is a palpable glee in many of these responses on this thread and others that wishes for others to fail, suffer and even die. Many here are absolutely wishing for the worst doomsday scenarios to befall their neighbors.

[vetusfirma]

WOW, some of you guys are really scary. I was born kind of poor, maybe upper lower class. Put myself through school, worked hard for my family and managed to become kind of rich, maybe lower upper class. All I can say is that I am glad it worked out this way and I like it. If you don’t like my success and the figural lifestyle that made me wealthy and is keeping me wealthy, tough.

A cool tirade I hear on the radio says “ Rich people are rich because they keep doing the things that make them rich, and poor people are poor because they keep doing the things that keep them poor, and it’s not the system. If you think it’s the system then just quit you job and go to work for a poor person, and see how that works out for you.” or something like that. Anyway, if you like your hole, then keep digging.

Just my thoughts.

[btu2012]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cowuvula', 't')hat is a rather painless way to go

[btu2012]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cowuvula', 'e')uorpe will completely be totally annihilated.western US will have some areas near the coast that are survivable. northern Russia siberia will have srvivors.
China will not have anything at all left on it, they get the smoke from europe and the rads will be enourmous.

[Soup]

OK all you cynics.... let's see if any of you can actually take up the cudgels as opposed to just whining on the web. Start a movement. Work your asses off , provide a whole raft of jobs for others,and sacrifice the best years of your life to get "rich" (whatever the hell that is, nett worth over $1m? I dunno)... then consciensciously share it with the "poor" (whatever the hell that is... nett worth under $10K ? I dunno)
To those who partake of the religion of Rich-Hate; You're either too lazy and jealousy is your suit, or you simply don't want to work that hard, and jealousy is your suit.

What do you want from the "rich"? Their spare time (they ain't got less than you I'd bet), their car? their money? (what for?), WHat is is you want from them... ahhah! I got it; you want their WEALTH.

Hmmm. And you really really really don't want THEM to be rich.

Who ,then ,should be "rich"? Anyone? Oh, that's right;no one should be "richer" than anyone else,and we should all carry figurative Mao-suits for-cheque-books round in our back pockets. RUssia tried that. WHat a fuckup. ANd hmm, lemme see... if the "richest" 300 million (and I'll BET you're one of them if you're reading this ), shared all their wealth with the other 5.7 billion

....(that's right, if the "rich" have to sacrifice for you, then you have to sacrifice for all THOSE FURTHER DOWN THE SCALE, or does that not fit with your "poorer therefore holier" moral crusade.??) ...

Again, start a crusade. Sell your computer and contribute that and 75% your weekly income to save the starving in africa and SthAmerica, and NY and London. After all, they see you as "rich" coz you've got a flash bike and a watch.... not to mention that groovey laptop and credit card, and white skin. And your education. And your privileged coffee with breakfast, or for that matter, breakfast!

YEs I know, you're sitting there in your little leftist shell glowering at this, but why not look at exactly how and why you're looking at this; a) you've got a computer and a web connection, so you're definitely not hungry b) you're highly literate, so somehow some goverment taxed the "rich" more than the "poor"(fair enough) to educate you (unless your parents were "rich" and put you through private schools which just makes your boojwah ass even more hypocritical) c) accept that there's a whole world out there and not everyone wants to wear Mao suits, or any other uniform, or be uniform in any actual or figurative form.

If just being "rich" makes someone abhorrent to you, it's you who has the problem. If their behaviour seems abhorrent have the guts to front them, not screech anonymously on the web to a whole raft of likeminded converteds. Seek out that "rich" persons perspective and wonder to yourself how much tax they paid to get there and how many "poor" actually have a job due to their savings capital funding small businesses and the entire "system"... and if you hate the "system" then show some guts!!! Don't use public roads, public hospitals, public toilets, public transport or any banks, shops, computers (isn't Bill Gates a bitch!, and as for that Dell bastid...) or wear clothing made of fibre or skins you didn't grow andpummle and spin or hunt down and gut and skin yourself. You see , sadly capitalism has it's flaws, but it sure has worked.... don't bitch at the ritch... accept that there's an inevitable consequence of civilisation, and that's that no two people are the same, and in fact that the nice little lilypad your boojwah ass is parked is a consequence of that. You're richer than the vast majority are. Either sell up and give it all away to the guy in the dumpster/refugee camp and go bush. 6 billion people shitting in the bush and the rivers ain't a good look for the planet; but doncha just hate those utility corporations! But hey, they're part of the "system" so we simply gotta shit all over the planet... duhhh?Ok, you contend that the rich should be taxed more, to treat your shit via public owned sewage works, just to level out the playing field, and to get those horrible utilities of the NYSE. It's good that the rich pay to treat your shit. ANd you pay to treat the shit of someone "poorer" than you??? Get a grip.

The past 100 years have been the only period in history where the general population's (in the West at least, but it's a good start) been generally wealthy enough to genuinely be able to create charity and a "system" beyond literally hand to mouth existence for the working man and woman, a bed for the VERY sick at hand. If some people got rich driving that general wealth upwards, then that's ok by me. The alternative is pretty crappy. Look at Eastern Europe pre 1989 (I did) Look at China pre 1996 (I did). THAT's what the Mao-suit-cheque-book looks like. Cruelty and poverty.... which as been the way of all people, cultures and undeed creatures since the first primordial slime. I repeat; Capitalism has it's flaws, but the alternatives are pretty crappy. Have a lovely day, and make sure you hand out your wealth judiciously.

[Pretorian]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kellan1776', '
')There have always been people like you who have hated those who have worked harder and have a little more.

[Jack]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kellan1776', 'F')ortunately you are a faceless nameless coward hiding behind your computer. Most of the 30 some odd billion people who have lived on this planet would change places in a second with any of us.

[Bman4k1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Soup', 'O')K all you cynics.... let's see if any of you can actually take up the cudgels as opposed to just whining on the web. Start a movement. Work your asses off , provide a whole raft of jobs for others,and sacrifice the best years of your life to get "rich" (whatever the hell that is, nett worth over $1m? I dunno)... then consciensciously share it with the "poor" (whatever the hell that is... nett worth under $10K ? I dunno)
To those who partake of the religion of Rich-Hate; You're either too lazy and jealousy is your suit, or you simply don't want to work that hard, and jealousy is your suit.

What do you want from the "rich"? Their spare time (they ain't got less than you I'd bet), their car? their money? (what for?), WHat is is you want from them... ahhah! I got it; you want their WEALTH.

Hmmm. And you really really really don't want THEM to be rich.

Who ,then ,should be "rich"? Anyone? Oh, that's right;no one should be "richer" than anyone else,and we should all carry figurative Mao-suits for-cheque-books round in our back pockets. RUssia tried that. WHat a Fark. ANd hmm, lemme see... if the "richest" 300 million (and I'll BET you're one of them if you're reading this ), shared all their wealth with the other 5.7 billion

....(that's right, if the "rich" have to sacrifice for you, then you have to sacrifice for all THOSE FURTHER DOWN THE SCALE, or does that not fit with your "poorer therefore holier" moral crusade.??) ...

Again, start a crusade........

YEs I know, you're sitting there in ........

If just being "rich" makes someone ..........

The past 100 years have been the only period in history where the general population's (in the West at least, but it's a good start) been generally wealthy enough to genuinely be able to create charity and a "system" beyond literally hand to mouth existence for the working man and woman, a bed for the VERY sick at hand. If some people got rich driving that general wealth upwards, then that's ok by me. The alternative is pretty crappy. Look at Eastern Europe pre 1989 (I did) Look at China pre 1996 (I did). THAT's what the Mao-suit-cheque-book looks like. Cruelty and poverty.... which as been the way of all people, cultures and undeed creatures since the first primordial slime. I repeat; Capitalism has it's flaws, but the alternatives are pretty crappy. Have a lovely day, and make sure you hand out your wealth judiciously.

[vision-master]

Not me, I'm on a fixed income, but time-rich anyhoo.

[smiley]

Becoming rich is a matter of constraint rather than anything else.

In order to become really rich you must keep your expenditures below your income. And you should do that for a very long period. That is why an overwhelming majority of the rich are really modest people. I don't think they should be blamed.

Don't confuse the people you see on MTV cribs flashing their car collection, with being rich. Having spend their record revenues as well as future (anticipated) revenues they are bankrupt the moment the record company drops them.

And that is really the problem. People spending things they don't have or cannot afford to spend.

And that is not confined to those MTV brats, and not to money alone. When you look at our world, our resources and our climate you see that what we are doing is taking a deposit on our future.

[Bman4k1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smiley', 'B')ecoming rich is a matter of constraint rather than anything else.

In order to become really rich you must keep your expenditures below your income. And you should do that for a very long period. That is why an overwhelming majority of the rich are really modest people. I don't think they should be blamed.

Don't confuse the people you see on MTV cribs flashing their car collection, with being rich. Having spend their record revenues as well as future (anticipated) revenues they are bankrupt the moment the record company drops them.

And that is really the problem. People spending things they don't have or cannot afford to spend.

And that is not confined to those MTV brats, and not to money alone. When you look at our world, our resources and our climate you see that what we are doing is taking a deposit on our future.

[btu2012]

I think that there are 3 classes of "rich":

1) The self-made rich, who usually accumulated their wealth by being frugal and owning a business. There are the majority of the "rich" with net worth in the 1 million-20 million dollar range. The anti-wealth criticism in this thread doesn't really apply well to those people

2) The "show off rich" -- mostly celebrities, windfall winners and over-paid executives, who are actually conspicuous spenders rather than rich on a net worth basis. These have a philosophy which is diametrically opposed to those in group 1)

3) The "generationally rich", which is what would properly be termed the "overclass". These are members of a small number of extremely rich families who managed to transfer and increase their hereditary wealth through generations. Examples include the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Du Ponts etc.

It is the third group who is the proper target for the criticism in this thread. Such people rarely have to work directly for their wealth -- at least after the second or third generation, and their wealth is mostly managed by others. These are the owners of the great banks etc. They do have quite a bit of illegitimate influence on the affairs of nations, and pursue their own political and social agendas in ways which are not transparent to the public. Perhaps surprisingly for some people, they usually pursue a strategy of inclusion and co-optation rather than one of direct conflict.

The members of class 1) are poor when compared with class 3), and they are famously looked down upon by the latter.

One needs to keep these distinctions in mind when discussing inequality. Someone with a net worth in the lower millions is not a member of the hereditary over-class, whose net worth usually counts in the billions. There is a vast difference between the values and world view of someone like RedStateGreen and someone like Jacob de Rothschild.

I am sure that those posters here who work in high finance can confirm the distinctions above, which are well understood in those circles.

So in a sense both sides of the discussion in this thread are right, and both of them are wrong.

People like RedStateGreen are hardly the "class enemy" of Marxist ideology, though people like Rockefeller might be construed as such.

On the other hand, the conspicuous spenders in class 2) are largely over-compensated people, whose earnings level could hardly be justified by their contributions to society. It should be pointed out, however, that the public at large seems to allow such compensation levels to continue, for example shareholders continue to support obscene levels of executive compensation for purely selfish reasons.

Another observation concerns the generational factor. Most people in class 1) were not born into wealth, but their children will be. These children are likely to develop the pathologies pointed out by other posters, unless their parents are extremely careful and strict with their education.

It is people born into wealth who tend to look down on those who where not so born, as I am sure that RedStateGreen can confirm. This is why someone like Warren Buffett is very strict with his son.

Btu