THE RADICAL AMERICAN MARXISTS (that don't exist)

a reply to: Puppylove

You can use poor analogies all that you want. For the most part, nobody is directly harmed by people keeping what is theirs. IF you were being intellectually honest in your analogies, you would realize what you're comparing gun and vehicle ownership to would only be relevant if we were talking about people using their money to hire hitmen or to purposefully destroy other people's lives with it.

The reality is that, yes, there are a few people out there who use their vast wealth for bad, but so do people with guns, and cars, and hammers, and medication, and many other things. But all of that is illegal--there are laws against it.

But people can collect guns and cars and hoard them away for all of eternity if they want to, and there's nothing illegal about it. There is no moral issue with doing that, as there is no moral issue with "hoarding" (e.g.: Saving) one's weatlh.

If every one-percenter released their money to be used by everyone at the snap of a finger, inflation would be through the roof and the value of the dollar would plummet. But that's not the point of my argument.

The argument that I'm using--about doing with their money what they wish--is specifically about their willingness to save it and keep it, not to do anything overtly evil with it. Again, your comparison is a false one, making your argument based on a logical fallacy, and therefore it really has zero merit in this argument. Deforming my argument to be something that it's not is a transparent tactic that doesn't fortify your side of the argument at all.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Wealth is a limited resource that people need to live. Is how we get basic necessities like food in the modern world. Because the basic necessities of life depend on it, it is not simply a thing but a need, if you want wealth to be a simple possession, then needs must first be met before you can do so.

Didn't like my original analogy? Here's a better one.

You live on an island with many people. You have on this island a storage space where you have all the food. You have the only key to the hut and the islanders have decided to trust you with rationing the food. In exchange you get whatever perks come with the position. Now over time you become greedy. You start rationing out less and less food. Eventually you and a few of your friends are fat with excess and everyone else is almost skin and bones, several people and children have died from being malnourished due to your bad decisions. They decide it was wrong to trust you with so much wealth (AKA) food. They come and take it by force, and decide a new way to ration the wealth/food, they do this because your greed made it a necessity. If you had instead rationed out the food reasonably so people weren't dying from starvation, there would likely never had been an uprising and you'd still have your head and your full belly.

These people are taking a limited resource and hoarding it to such an excess people aren't getting their basic needs as a result. Many whom are worked literally to death in some countries because their pay is not enough to meet the needs of them and their families. Defend this behavior by the filthy rich all you want, but in the end, if they do not restore a reasonable balance, they will get their due as have all greedy bastards before them when their time has come.

You mention them snapping their fingers and liquidating their accounts and spreading it among the populace. Which I and no one else is asking for, that's what happens when the people are forced to start taking heads. What people want, actually no, what people NEED is their basic needs met, especially when they are working for them. You # with people's basic needs, all while expecting them to slave to death for a chance at basic survival, don't be surprised when the torches and pitchforks come out.

No one is asking to eliminate a wealth gap, no one is suggesting to eliminate reward for success, what people are asking for is to keep it #ing reasonable because if you don't you leave people no goddamn choice but to fight back in simple self defense, cause your greed is literally killing them and their loved ones.

a reply to: GodEmperor

I'm not talking about Marxism. The literally only things needed as regulations to make what I want work is a wealth cap and/or a limit to max wage that correlates directly to the wage of the lowest paid worker in the company that's reasonable. Meaning no more getting paid hundreds of times what the lowest paid worker does. Meaning the better the company does the better everyone does. Get rid of the minimum wage, and instead make everyone live and die by the success of where they work. If the company does well the workers do well because profits go up for everybody, if profits go down, then pay goes down for everybody. No more minimum wage, but minimum percent of the profit and maximum percent of the profit.

My main issue was that, having issues with excessive wealth is not only reasonable but not innately Marxist as was claimed and taken to extremes becomes not only necessary but an inevitability. One that if ignored is done so at one's peril.

I mean I don't understand how something that seems so obvious can be so misunderstood. When an excessive amount of people end up in dire and desperate straights due to one's actions or inaction they will be forced by simple necessity to respond. Most will not fight a hopeless battle, but as their numbers swell and the battle becomes less hopeless the risk becomes greater that they will claim what is needed for survival, one way or another. It's a simple fact of life. All that's necessary to prevent this is make sure basic needs are met without abject slavery to meet them. Yet for some crazy reason people insist on ignoring this delicate balance and try pushing their luck, and pretend the people they push to desperate measures are the bad guys.

No one needs to give up all their wealth to meet the worlds basic needs, it could be done easily without making a dent in the lifestyles of the rich and famous. It doesn't happen because they choose not to and insist on rolling the dice. Eventually they'll roll snake eyes if they keep it up, and when you roll snake eyes guess what, you lose.

a reply to: zosimov

take that vid down.. for the love of God!

Oh thats sick - I cant unsee that!. I normally dont click on vids...you tempted me! Yuk it's all your fault

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Oh dear, I offer up my most sincere apology.. I certainly never intended to promote the vid.

If ever arises another time I use the phrase "for the love of God" you can know I'm dead serious.

a reply to: Puppylove

Still a poor analogy, because no one person in the world holds the key to all of the money.

We'll just agree to disagree as to the alarmism that you espouse concerning private wealth and the supposed moral obligation that comes with it.

Just for the record, why do you think that money is a limited thing? It's because putting too much of it out there in circulation decreases its value--similar to how diamond sales are regulated to create a false shortage and therefore increase the value. Those who hoard money, apparently much to your disappointment, help keep the value of the dollar just a little bit higher than if they were to keep most of it out there circulating around.

But to be fair, with the way the Federal Reserve can destroy money and temporarily create it and then take it away, all in efforts to alter how much is in circulation, this discussion is moot because, hoarded or not, there is a governing body that closely watches and knows how much of its currency is out there, and they have very easy and simple ways of manipulating that on a whim and, basically, at the snap of a finger.

This isn't the Great Depression of the 1930s...electronic money is easily created and removed from the U.S. monetary system. This alarmist concern over "money hoarders" is, quite honestly, a red herring used to demonize those with great wealth.

You should be more disgusted at how the Federal Reserve works than those who save their money--just a thought.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: SlapMonkey

What people want, actually no, what people NEED is their basic needs met, especially when they are working for them. You # with people's basic needs, all while expecting them to slave to death for a chance at basic survival, don't be surprised when the torches and pitchforks come out.

... what people are asking for is to keep it #ing reasonable because if you don't you leave people no goddamn choice but to fight back in simple self defense, cause your greed is literally killing them and their loved ones.

Hyperbole, much? Jesus...

a reply to: SlapMonkey

What hyperbole, the world is literally rampant with poverty, starvation, death, and slave wages for unreasonably long work weeks, not to mention actual slaves when we have more than enough resources to prevent all of this. Did you think I just meant how things are in the US?

a reply to: Puppylove

Well, considering that's what this thread is about--the existence of Marxists and those who espouse such economic ideals IN AMERICA.

I feel like that guy in the State Farm commercial: "Well, the thread's about America, sooo..."

a reply to: zosimov

"for the love of God" you can know I'm dead serious.

Its all good...was a few days ago...I dont think it affected me...now I just have to clean certain evidence away before they come knocking on my door.