Support NeoGAF

[Buddha Beam]

Surely they worked extra hard for their money.

It's hard work waiting for the dividend check to arrive, I'll have you know.

 

[PanicFreak]

Why is a bank CEO getting paid $3000 for sitting one hour at a desk while the employee is paid only $30 ‽‽‽

Wages should be capped and standardized so that the earnings of corporations can be distributed more fairly.

I disagree. Wages should not be capped but CEOs shouldn't be getting paid like they are entrepreneurs.

Executive pay is a really fucked up situation. Most Fortune 500 CEO contracts are mean tested. Generally, when a new CEO is given the job they are given a salary slightly above the mean of other CEOs. Thus, the mean continually rises until CEOs are paid more 200 times what the average worker makes.

 

[Tacitus_]

What's with all the "yeah but people are poorer overseas than they are here!" posts? Not exactly something that goes against those calling for wealth redistibution.

I have nothing against wealth redistribution (and I like my country's heavy taxes), but it's damn annoying when people are railing against being born to richness (compared to the rest of the world), when pretty much everyone on gaf was born to a life of richness and privilege compared to the rest of the world.
Have some sense of scale people.

 

[showx]

Couldn't agree more. Apple CEO Tim Cook earned his 379 million a year by studying six thousand two hundred and fifty eight times harder than the typical 60k a year employee.

When you live in a capitalist society you should understand how it works.

 

[User Name Here]

I thought it was 60%?

 

[Irobot82]

I have nothing against wealth redistribution (and I like my country's heavy taxes), but it's damn annoying when people are railing against being born to richness (compared to the rest of the world), when pretty much everyone on gaf was born to a life of richness and privilege compared to the rest of the world.
Have some sense of scale people.

+1

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The United States holds a disproportionate amount of the world's rich people.

It only takes $34,000 a year, after taxes, to be among the richest 1% in the world. That's for each person living under the same roof, including children. (So a family of four, for example, needs to make $136,000.)
---
The true global middle class, falls far short of owning a home, having a car in a driveway, saving for retirement and sending their kids to college. In fact, people at the world's true middle -- as defined by median income -- live on just $1,225 a year. (And, yes, Milanovic's numbers are adjusted to account for different costs of living across the globe.)

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/04/news/economy/world_richest/index.htm

But off with their heads, right gaf?

$136,000 after taxes is a lot. I don't think many on GAF fall under that.

 

[Tacitus_]

$136,000 after taxes is a lot. I don't think many on GAF fall under that.

That's the total for a family of four. A single person would require 34k.

 

[empty vessel]

That's the total for a family of four. A single person would require 34k.

We're conflating income with wealth again. Income is a flow of money measured over a period of time. Wealth is accumulated (hoarded) money (or real assets measured by money).

 

[BattleMonkey]

Come now, we've left 60% for everyone else. You all still get the majority.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Many of those 40% atleast worked towards a productive society.

In a 1st world nation, if you study hard and work hard you will have a good life, 99 out of 100 times. There's no reason to complain.

The reason our societies are shit is not just because the rich hoard too much money, it's because another 40% of people are lazy bums whose aim is to work the least possible, instead of going for success.

Even in college I see this, almost nobody takes their studies as hard as they should, including myself. You guys generalize the rich like you would a minority, and there are plenty of rich people that earned their money.

My lulz, you has them all.

 

[Dead Man]

Many of those 40% atleast worked towards a productive society.

In a 1st world nation, if you study hard and work hard you will have a good life, 99 out of 100 times. There's no reason to complain.

The reason our societies are shit is not just because the rich hoard too much money, it's because another 40% of people are lazy bums whose aim is to work the least possible, instead of going for success.

Even in college I see this, almost nobody takes their studies as hard as they should, including myself. You guys generalize the rich like you would a minority, and there are plenty of rich people that earned their money.

Oh dear. 99% of the time you will be fine as long as you work hard? LOL

Edit: That too, Angelus Errare.

 

[leroidys]

Many of those 40% atleast worked towards a productive society.

In a 1st world nation, if you study hard and work hard you will have a good life, 99 out of 100 times. There's no reason to complain.

The reason our societies are shit is not just because the rich hoard too much money, it's because another 40% of people are lazy bums whose aim is to work the least possible, instead of going for success.

Even in college I see this, almost nobody takes their studies as hard as they should, including myself. You guys generalize the rich like you would a minority, and there are plenty of rich people that earned their money.

Ahahahaha. Still in college, knows everything about how the world works. Love it.

 

[User 406]

If the ultra-wealthy want to keep their heads on their shoulders, they should educate themselves about what happens to a privileged ruling class that forces the lower classes further into poverty, then take some personal responsibility and use a fraction of their wealth to modify the system to make sure that the lower classes will be comfortable enough to not kill them. But those superrich people are just too lazy and entitled to motivate themselves and work to make their future secure. They'd rather just keep feeding their capital gains addiction while leeching off the proletariat. You can't expect much from them, they just don't value life the way we do.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

If the ultra-wealthy want to keep their heads on their shoulders, they should educate themselves about what happens to a privileged ruling class that forces the lower classes further into poverty, then take some personal responsibility and use a fraction of their wealth to modify the system to make sure that the lower classes will be comfortable enough to not kill them. But those superrich people are just too lazy and entitled to motivate themselves and work to make their future secure. They'd rather just keep feeding their capital gains addiction while leeching off the proletariat. You can't expect much from them, they just don't value life the way we do.

Uh, what's going to happen? Can you name the last revolution in the Western world that resulted in a violent powershift in favour of the poorer classes?

 

[RukusProvider]

What is ultra wealthy? I really wish we had a hard published figure for each country.

In the US, should we kill all the CEO's and executives who make above 500k? 1million?

What about high end sales people? they can draw in 500K+ like clockwork.

What about all the people in the tech field who make millions as employees with their stock options? Can we kill them also?

I mean, who knows which one of those asshole will have the ambition to start their own company and then become a ultra wealthy CEO one day? Kill em now before they become a problem right?

Can someone draw up a project plan for this or do we need some of these ultra wealthy to work out the logistics using their company's products?

 

[empty vessel]

Uh, what's going to happen? Can you name the last revolution in the Western world that resulted in a violent powershift in favour of the poorer classes?

And that's how FDR saved capitalism.

 

[Dead Man]

Uh, what's going to happen? Can you name the last revolution in the Western world that resulted in a violent powershift in favour of the poorer classes?

They rarely work (never), but they always kill a lot of people, often rich people.

 

[akira28]

some people are going to snap and I don't want to be anywhere near where it happens.

 

[captmorgan]

If the ultra-wealthy want to keep their heads on their shoulders, they should educate themselves about what happens to a privileged ruling class that forces the lower classes further into poverty, then take some personal responsibility and use a fraction of their wealth to modify the system to make sure that the lower classes will be comfortable enough to not kill them. But those superrich people are just too lazy and entitled to motivate themselves and work to make their future secure. They'd rather just keep feeding their capital gains addiction while leeching off the proletariat. You can't expect much from them, they just don't value life the way we do.

Or they could use even a smaller fraction of their wealth to hire people to use military grade weapons to exterminate anyone that looks in their direction....hmmm which one will they choose?

 

[captmorgan]

Now I kinda want to see after the bloody revolution how long it would take to be right back in the same situation 5 maybe ten years. As well the fighting over the created power vacuum would kill so many people probably in the millions if not 10`s of millions.

 

[injurai]

They earned it. They did 40% of the work!

:lol

 

[Kickz]

Rest of us gotta hustle for the remaining 50%!

 

[Hieberrr]

I side with both sides. But let's not forget that the top 1% for the most part are rich because they themselves or their families have done some smart shit.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

They rarely work (never), but they always kill a lot of people, often rich people.

Which revolutions are you referring to?

Also, another thing some posters here like to do is to generalize "the rich" or the "1%". This is a mistake. 99% of the 1% just played the game, got lucky and joined the elite club. It's the 1% of the 1% and in some cases 1% of the 1% of the 1% ultra rich and powerful people that actually make the rules that influence the lives of everyone else. Being angry at some "bankers" because they're gaming the system is missing the point, the blame lies with those that designed the system.

 

[bengraven]

Sorry other countries, but you are FUCKED.

>=) MERIKA MERIKA MERKIA ! WOOT

They rarely work (never), but they always kill a lot of people, often rich people.

Mostly never. Basically the organizers of the revolt end up being the new wealthy and the cycle continues.

It never changes.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

The worst part is that they are hoarding that money. Isn't there almost 32 Trillion in overseas accounts?

This is what I always think about. How can we have continual economic growth if increasing amounts of money are siphoned out of the economy? I really wish someone versed in economics could explain this to me.

 

[Dead Man]

Which revolutions are you referring to?

Also, another thing some posters here like to do is to generalize "the rich" or the "1%". This is a mistake. 99% of the 1% just played the game, got lucky and joined the elite club. It's the 1% of the 1% and in some cases 1% of the 1% of the 1% ultra rich and powerful people that actually make the rules that influence the lives of everyone else. Being angry at some "bankers" because they're gaming the system is missing the point, the blame lies with those that designed the system.

LOL no. But if it makes you feel better, drive on. As for which revolutions, all of them? None of them work, and all of them kill a lot of people.

 

[Lunchbox]

LOL no. But if it makes you feel better, drive on.

i got a swiss watch today

feels good

 

[Lagspike_exe]

This is what I always think about. How can we have continual economic growth if increasing amounts of money are siphoned out of the economy? I really wish someone versed in economics could explain this to me.

Because money is being constantly created, primarily via the fractional reserve banking system. If, for example, the Fed sets the reserve rate at 20%, when someone puts his/hers money into the bank, the bank is free to lend up to 80% of that amount in the form of credit. Those 80% when deposited create new credit (64% of the original amont) and so on, until 1/r (where r is the reserve rate % rate) is created. In this case, this means that 1/0.2 was created or 5X the original deposit amount. Fed also has some other mechanisms through wich it can influence the money creation in the system.

LOL no. But if it makes you feel better, drive on. As for which revolutions, all of them? None of them work, and all of them kill a lot of people.

So, what you're saying is that the majority of the rich people somehow influenced laws and the governance system and used their position to become rich?

 

[Chuck Norris]

Awesome, can't wait it to trickle down!

Maybe not in terms of cash money, but it seems to me like the standard of living has never been higher. I mean what is the actual difference between the living standards of rich and middle class? Food is mostly the same, differences in clothing is mostly material (branding), same access to electronics. The only real things that seem off limit to middle class is huge property ownership and luxury items like yachts and ferraris. Which doesn't really effect standards of living.

 

[Tristam]

What is ultra wealthy? I really wish we had a hard published figure for each country.

In the US, should we kill all the CEO's and executives who make above 500k? 1million?

What about high end sales people? they can draw in 500K+ like clockwork.

What about all the people in the tech field who make millions as employees with their stock options? Can we kill them also?

I mean, who knows which one of those asshole will have the ambition to start their own company and then become a ultra wealthy CEO one day? Kill em now before they become a problem right?

Can someone draw up a project plan for this or do we need some of these ultra wealthy to work out the logistics using their company's products?

I don't think many people begrudge the extremely wealthy for making money in a conventional manner. People begrudge the extremely wealthy because a fairly large number of the wealthy deliberately wield their vastly outsized influence in their respective nations' political processes to ensure that greater sums of wealth continue to 'trickle up' to them.

 

[Dead Man]

So, what you're saying is that the majority of the rich people somehow influenced laws and the governance system and used their position to become rich?

LOL, no, try reading what I have written again. There are other options besides using influence to become rich. Here's a hint: How do you have influence if you aren't already rich?

 

[demon]

Maybe not in terms of cash money, but it seems to me like the standard of living has never been higher. I mean what is the actual difference between the living standards of rich and middle class? Food is mostly the same, differences in clothing is mostly material (branding), same access to electronics. The only real things that seem off limit to middle class is huge property ownership and luxury items like yachts and ferraris. Which doesn't really effect standards of living.

In the US, is this really true for the lower and middle class? What about healthcare coverage? Affordable higher education, or quality of education in general? How's that poverty rate and hunger rate coming along? Yes yes, we're not Mumbai or some Ethiopian village, but I think we should set our standards for what to strive for a little higher than that.

 

[Sanky Panky]

Be quiet serfs!

Fulfill your duty to help pay for government bond interest via income taxes, borrow as much as you can on your petty salaries so we can get the cash flow on the bundled debt, and consume whatever our cartels throw at you. Moreover, when it is time to sacrifice for the greater good by paying even more taxes, or surrender your assets, shut up and take it; it is your fault.

K Thnx bai

- the 1%

 

[kame-sennin]

They rarely work (never), but they always kill a lot of people, often rich people.

A non-violent revolution has a much higher chance of success than violent revolt, but whenever there's a protest movement people criticize them for being "dirty hippies".

 

[captmorgan]

A non-violent revolution has a much higher chance of success than violent revolt, but whenever there's a protest movement people criticize them for being "dirty hippies".

Thats because 99% of the time they are dirty hippes.

If you want a truly truly terrifying protest, have thousands and thousands of people march into city hall looking like lawyers. Business power suits, brief cases, and paper work...mountains and mountains of paper work.

That would scare the shit out of any 1%

 

[demon]

Thats because 99% of the time they are dirty hippes.

The best recent example of a 'major protest' would by the Occupy Wall Street movement, and wasn't the meme that "it's mostly unemployed dirty hippies" in fact a load of shit?

 

[Timedog]

starving children in Africa aren't working hard enough.

 

[Dead Man]

starving children in Africa aren't working hard enough.

They've just got to get in the game.

Thats because 99% of the time they are dirty hippes.

If you want a truly truly terrifying protest, have thousands and thousands of people march into city hall looking like lawyers. Business power suits, brief cases, and paper work...mountains and mountains of paper work.

That would scare the shit out of any 1%

Hah, that would be hilarious.

 

[kame-sennin]

Thats because 99% of the time they are dirty hippes.

So you wouldn't show solidarity with a group of people fighting for YOUR rights because you don't like the way they dress? As I said, Americans have been trained to sneer at people engaging in direct action rather than participate, which is why the left has been decimated and the government has been co-opted by corporations.

If you want a truly truly terrifying protest, have thousands and thousands of people march into city hall looking like lawyers. Business power suits, brief cases, and paper work...mountains and mountains of paper work.

That would scare the shit out of any 1%

If the system still functioned, there wouldn't be a need for revolutionary movements. The executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government are under the control of corporate plutocrats. The established mechanisms for reform have broken down. You will not change the system by filing a lawsuit or calling your congressperson or voting democrat.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

And that's how FDR saved capitalism.

We need another FDR

 

[jaxword]

If anyone here is rich, I'll do stuff.

 

[ezrarh]

We need another FDR

We need fear in the hearts of the capitalists.

 

[empty vessel]

We need fear in the hearts of the capitalists.

That's how you get an FDR.

 

[CrazedProfessional]

I wonder if there's a correlation between the decline of organized labor and the percentage of wealth owned by the super wealthy.

 

[RyanDG]

I wonder if there's a correlation between the decline of organized labor and the percentage of wealth owned by the super wealthy.

Always relevant.

 

[CrazedProfessional]

Shit man, this world is heading to a dark place, isn't it?

 

[Plywood]

Just think, they probably won't even spend any of it.

 

[OrlanisWorks]

Shit man, this world is heading to a dark place, isn't it?

I hope your being sarcastic. Comparitively, I think we are pretty much in the best place.


Still, we ain't heading toward a dark place, because we are still trying to move further into the light. We are still in "a dark place."