Thread: Pelosi Proposes Salary Controls for Health Insurance

Originally Posted by Imperator

and what if they do? ( I have not agreed btw) so what? You an make your pile and hoard it to if you wish. You would not be hurting me or anyone else.

Actually, it does hurt all of us. It slows down the economy, and restricts opportunity for those who are trying to get ahead. It creates an aristocracy in what is supposed to be a land of equals.

Even the WSJ did an article a while back on the completely different world that the rich live in. The privileges and special rights that they can buy in the system are distubring.

Originally Posted by Imperator

are ambition, motivation and work selfish?

I didn't say that they were.

Selfishness is selfish.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

It's reality. The rich hoard their money. They don't reintroduce it to the economy.

You're going to have to explain your thinking to me on this. It is beyond me how you have managed to come up with this theory.

I mean...really....do the wealthy not travel? Do they not eat out? Do they not purchase big houses and expensive cars? What the hell are you even thinking?!!

For petes sake...Tiger Woods pissed away enough money on hookers alone to finance a small village!

Sorry to interrupt, but did anyone come up with a link yet where Pelosi said anything remotely like the OP is claiming?

Originally Posted by lutherf

You're going to have to explain your thinking to me on this. It is beyond me how you have managed to come up with this theory.

I mean...really....do the wealthy not travel? Do they not eat out? Do they not purchase big houses and expensive cars? What the hell are you even thinking?!!

For petes sake...Tiger Woods pissed away enough money on hookers alone to finance a small village!

Travel? Some. Expensive cars? A few. Houses? Yep. And then they're passed down. And passed down. The money leaves the economy.

If you give $10,000 to someone at the poverty level, that money will re-enter the economy almost immediately as purchased goods and services. If you give $10,000 to someone at the other end of the scale, that money will sit in a bank and collect a modicum of interest. it doesn't add to economic flow in anywhere near the same degree that the first case would.

Well, I can tell the people in here who've actually met rich people, and those who haven't. Rich people don't get that way by buying a bunch of shit.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Actually, it does hurt all of us. It slows down the economy, and restricts opportunity for those who are trying to get ahead. It creates an aristocracy in what is supposed to be a land of equals.

How does Rockefellar or the Kennedys or Buffett hoarding their assets hurt you pram?

Even the WSJ did an article a while back on the completely different world that the rich live in. The privileges and special rights that they can buy in the system are distubring.

So wealth equals ...what? Disenfranchisement of you or I?

Originally Posted by Imperator

How does Rockefellar or the Kennedys or Buffett hoarding their assets hurt you pram?

So wealth equals ...what? Disenfranchisement of you or I?

I've explained it twice. I'm not sure that a third time is going to accomplish anything.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

I didn't say that they were.

Selfishness is selfish.

you said;

A nice myth that helps the selfish to sleep better.

in reference to this from Lutherf;

Show me any socioeconomic system where there are no poor. Some of the most highly managed systems the world has known have had the most poverty. (ie. Soviet Union) Poverty, in a free country, is due primarily to life choices.

hence my response, are you not referring to the rich or those that have wealth and when challenged say hey you to can have it and if you don't its a life choice education, motivation, ambition etc etc etc.?

Originally Posted by pramjockey

I've explained it twice. I'm not sure that a third time is going to accomplish anything.

this?

If you give $10,000 to someone at the poverty level, that money will re-enter the economy almost immediately as purchased goods and services. If you give $10,000 to someone at the other end of the scale, that money will sit in a bank and collect a modicum of interest. it doesn't add to economic flow in anywhere near the same degree that the first case would.

It's like the left got together and pondered how they could best blow themselves up. Pelosi must think what goes on in her twisted mind also occurs within the general population's grey matter.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

So, why should top executives in the US be able to take so much money out of the system at the expense of the rest of us?

Why do some of you support top-down class warfare, but so vehemently claim to oppose it when it comes from the other direction?

Because they earn it. If you put the average "rest of us" in that position that company would go down the toilet. That executive was put in that position to earn money for the company and their stock holders. Not to "distribute the wealth" to those that want a free hand out and have Nanny Government support them.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Travel? Some. Expensive cars? A few. Houses? Yep. And then they're passed down. And passed down. The money leaves the economy.

If you give $10,000 to someone at the poverty level, that money will re-enter the economy almost immediately as purchased goods and services. If you give $10,000 to someone at the other end of the scale, that money will sit in a bank and collect a modicum of interest. it doesn't add to economic flow in anywhere near the same degree that the first case would.

Dude, what the fuck do you think the bank does with that money? It doesn't just sit there in a pile collecting dust. It gets loaned to other people to buy things and build things and do things. The whole damned economy flows through banks and it wouldn't grow a lick without banks.