Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
For private individuals who cannot print money and cannot effect the rate that a government prints money, the economy is a zero sum game. So the rich hoarding wealth directly impacts and impoverishes the rest of us.
Peepin made the claim, and supported it saying that the 1% own more than the entire middle class. You dismissed that, and demanded a high level of evidence for a different claim, the claim that [all the]* stock can be converted to cash.
But that wasn't the original claim. Owning stock is still a form of owning wealth, even if it isn't perfectly liquid. Peepin's claims of the 1% owning more than the middle class is true.
How to say you don't understand wealth or cash.
I already supported that claim:
For private individuals who cannot print money and cannot effect the rate that a government prints money, the economy is a zero sum game.
You can't just magic a few zeros onto your bank account. Wealth has to come from somewhere. Every dollar you make selling car tires (assuming you even own said production) means that a dollar of potential sales has been used. There is a limit to how many car tires can be sold. It is for the most part a zero sum game.
Regardless of how you're ignoring what I said:
https://www.epi.org/blog/inequality-main-persistent-poverty/
Are you saying stocks are not a form of wealth?
Or does this comment merely serve to insult my intelligence?
Neither can Elon. Yet you tried to link the two. The rich have nothing to do with you being poor. That’s economics 101.
I don’t buy into the economic inequality theory. It’s bogus. Rich people are not why you are poor.
It is but it’s not cash. It’s not easy to convert that amount of stock to cash. It’s funny money.
That's my point. There is a limit to how many car tires can be sold. So when the rich sell more, that necessarily takes away potential sales from others. It's basically a zero sum game.
And the rich own all the factories and production. So every dollar of product they sell is a dollar of sales that goes to them. That leaves not enough for the rest of us, making us impoverished.
But it's wealth. And the original claim was about wealth, not cash. You are moving the goal posts, which is fallacious.
Not sure you understand how companies work. When they sell something. It doesn’t go into the pocket of Elon. It does into the funds of the company. For every Tesla sold. Elon receives zero dollars.
Elon owns zero factories. Same with bezos. Neither own any of those items.
Zero dollar goes to either one. I’m starting to see why you make the rants you make. You don’t understand shareholders or companies well.
If I buy ten teslas. Elon received zero dollars. If I spend a million dollars at Amazon bezos receives zero dollars.
Again, you're getting hung up on literal cash. Cash is not the only form of wealth. And the rich get their wealth from these companies. Sometimes it is literal cash, but most often it is in the form of stocks.
And the wealth these companies earn disproportionately goes to the rich, the stock holders, upper management, etc.
The rich own the companies that own the production. I know you're more intelligent than this.
Again, you're getting hung up on the distinction between cash, stock, and wealth.
You mean the employee. Pension funds. 401k. I get stock as part of my job.
Also you are confusing earnings with dividends. The two are not the same. Earning go the company. They don’t go to the list you created. Earnings only go to the company.
You mean facts and logic. The differences are important. It’s why you struggle with these topics because it’s all magic and unicorns. You don’t get why Elon is wealthy or how he became wealthy. You just want to feel he took your money but you never bought a Tesla. It’s strange thinking.
I thought you were self employed? You must be one of those gay black men with trans friends.
I have side jobs that I do but I’m a w2 for main income. Part of my package is stock
I never mentioned either of them, because i am not talking about the literal specifics of how the wealth is distributed. You have no point here.
No. You are getting hung up on the actual methods of how the wealth is distributed, cherrypicking the ways in which it is not as a means to say that the rich aren't extracting wealth.
Your argument relies on fallacies the whole way through.
I’m not hung up on anything but facts. I’m just shocked out how wrong you are, yet are confident you are correct. Since your whole premise is false, you end up with false conclusions. You think everything is magic and unicorn's.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2019/05/14/no-the-rich-didnt-get-rich-at-the-expense-of-the-poor/?sh=db336d338ca5
Quoting Forbes for this is hilarious.
I get it. You hate citations but that’s how facts work. Not your incoherent ramblings.