OT: Richest 2% own more than half the world

[Ryan Schaecher]

Guess some of you missed my point. I did not say that the employment situation was bleak. What I did say was that the 4.5% figure simply means that 4.5% of us are collecting unemployment, and that is all that figure means. The rest of what I stated was just examples of better indicators.

Let me remind you that these were the same figures that President Clinton was touting for the last 4 years he was in office and the same figures that the Democrats used to blast President Bush on between 2002 and well, today. What good for one is good for all.



Is it the best measurement? Hell no. As an Economist I can vouch for that. However, the measurement is not an exclusove use of one party.

Would be nice if one of these persons you mention were a coal miner or something like that.

Sorry, coal miner won't work. Union.



Coal mine owner, yes.



It's nearly impossible for someone to become a gazillionaire by working for someone else. There are few exceptions:

-Walmart (prior to it's IPO, stock was valued around $.01/share. Post 1970 IPO, $50/share. Do the math)

-Intel (Again thanks to it's IPO)

-Google (Again thanks to it's IPO)

-Apple (Again thanks to it's IPO)





It is extremely unlikely that a worker will make more than the owner. You want to be a millionaire, start your own business.

Just wondered, is the reason he is not in the top 1% because he is not working hard enough or is it because he needs more education?

Neither. He is working for someone else. Please don't take it as a slam, but if you don't have an MBA as well and you two work together, then one of you two is in the wrong place. Unless "you" WANT to be there. It's not too common for an MBA and a BS to be working the same job unless the MBA wants to be there.



It's common sence. If you want to be in the top 1%, you need to take chances, work hard, have a lot of luck and be your own boss.



The Waltons (Walmart), Rockefellers, Mellons, Carnigies, etc of inherited money will continue to make more and more money, but not by their own doing it was their ancestors who made the money.



It's the Michael Dell's, David Neeleman (JetBlue), Richard Branson (Virgin Group), Paul Allen (Microsoft), Gordon Moore (Intel), et al who make it on their own. They leverage their assest to the hilt, live in the back of a car, scrimp every penney, but most importantly took a risk. They didn't work for anyone but themselves (and now they work for shareholders).



In the last 20 years, the Forbes list of Billionaires has climbed from 120 to more than 475. In that list there are 337 Americans, or 71% of the list.







The Top 10 Most Successful Entrepreneurs in America:

Name

1. Gates, William H. III (Microsoft) (richest in world)

2. Ellison, Lawrence (Oracle) (#15 in the world)

3. Allen, Paul (Microsoft) (#6 in the world)

4. Buffet, Warren (Investment Group) (#2 in the world)

5. Moore, Gordon (Intel) (#181)

6. Anschutz, Phillip (Quest Communications) (#89 in the world)

7. Ballmer, Steven (Microsoft) (#24)

13. Dell, Michael (Dell Computers) (#12)

14. Redstone, Summer (Viacom) (#63)

15. Kluge, John (Metromedia) (#52)



(8-12 are Walton relations and while they continue to build wealth, they started with inheritance)

 

[John Draper]

1. Gates, William H. III (Microsoft) (richest in world)

2. Ellison, Lawrence (Oracle) (#15 in the world)

3. Allen, Paul (Microsoft) (#6 in the world)

4. Buffet, Warren (Investment Group) (#2 in the world)

5. Moore, Gordon (Intel) (#181)

6. Anschutz, Phillip (Quest Communications) (#89 in the world)

7. Ballmer, Steven (Microsoft) (#24)

13. Dell, Michael (Dell Computers) (#12)

14. Redstone, Summer (Viacom) (#63)

15. Kluge, John (Metromedia) (#52)



(8-12 are Walton relations and while they continue to build wealth, they started with inheritance)

Oh, you name dropper you.



Seriously, all of these fit into my "cannot use" catagory. And the only reason I used coal miner is because, off the top of my head, I couldn't think of anyone that works harder.

Let me remind you that these were the same figures that President Clinton was touting for the last 4 years he was in office and the same figures that the Democrats used to blast President Bush on between 2002 and well, today. What good for one is good for all.

I don't care, :blink: If your telling me this because you think I'm a liberal, your wrong, although not all of my views are conservative, they are not all liberal either. Example, I have been a NRA member for the last 16 years and I usually use their suggestions on who to vote for as my first consideration.

It's common sence. If you want to be in the top 1%, you need to take chances, work hard, have a lot of luck and be your own boss.

No argument here, I agree, especially my "lot of luck" part. I cannot find much (worth debating) in your last post that I can disagree with.

You want to be a millionaire, start your own business.

I would add "and hope for success". I knew a couple who started three businesses, the first two failed and they filed for bankruptcy on the first two (as a REIT stockholder, glad it was back then and not now), the third attempt I am not sure of as I lost contact.



Hard to debate when both parties seem to be in agreement.



Soooo, to keep the debate going, I would have to take issue with your use of the word "Kommiefornia" in your first post on this tread. If this is the place I think it is, don't they have a Republican Governor?

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

I don't care, If your telling me this because you think I'm a liberal, your wrong, although not all of my views are conservative, they are not all liberal either. Example, I have been a NRA member for the last 16 years and I usually use their suggestions on who to vote for as my first consideration.

I didn't put that there to claim that anyone was conservative or liberal, I was just using the example of the double standard that exists in this country and especially in Journalism and Politics.

Soooo, to keep the debate going, I would have to take issue with your use of the word "Kommiefornia" in your first post on this tread. If this is the place I think it is, don't they have a Republican Governor?

He's a Republican in name only. He's definately not the same type of Republican the last Actor/Govenor of California was.



I refer to California as "Kommiefornia" or PRK (People's Republic of Kalifornia, a reference to both Communist North Korea (People's Republic of North Korea) and Communist China (People's Republic of China)) in jest. I lived there for 10 years. If you like it, you can keep it. The politics are obsurd, especially in the Bay area. San Diego (where I was at, Ramona actually) wasn't quite so ass-backward. The state-wide politicians, policies and principles are in near contrast to my personal beliefs.



Being an NRA member, you should know the idiotic treatment that gun owners (such as myself) get in places like California, Illinois (another hell-hole I've lived in), New York, New Jersey, Massachusets, etc. have to deal with. I have my FFL03 license and am an avid gun nut. Every year I get a book of all federal and state laws reguarding firearms, firearm ownership and firearm use. I live in Arkansas. Our laws take 1.5 pages of the nearly 500 page book. California takes more than 73 pages. That's just the state. You add in places like San Fransisco, Oakland, and Sacramento and the page count goes quite a bit higher.



I have 9 firearms and a parts kit that will become an AK shortly after Christmas. Of the 10 that I will have, 3 are NOT CA LEGAL (AK (hi-cap with detachable mags), M59/66 SKS (evil grenade launcher), handgun (has not passed PRK's obsurd handgun test)). But I can have them without question in Arkansas. IF I had a Class III (fully automatic), I cannot legally live in California with it.



I don't see California as being a very pro-entrepreneur state (though I'm sure other's will disagree). The taxes are too high, the wages are too high, the regulatory proceedures are rediculous, the "idiot marking" (extra signs needed, like "chemicals in this facility are know to the state of Kommiefornia to cause cancer"), etc. all make it tough for a small guy to start a successful business.



You add in the "actors" that preach one thing, then do another. The high cost of fuel. The high cost of eletricity. The high cost of water. The high cost of sewer. The high cost for just about everything in comparison to where I live, pass. Thanks.



So in essence, I call Kommiefornia the way I see it... a Communist state. It's not just about the guns, but it's all the politics. They offend me, and that takes one heckuva lot to do. I know how to live my life the way I want. I don't need a politician telling me when I can and can't wash my Sport Trac. I don't need a politician taxing the h#!! out of me because I own an SUT. I don't need to have my wife get a job just so we can barely make our housing payments.



Are people wrong for living there? Nope. There is the one really good thing that PRK has going for it.... the property tax laws. I know people that have lived in the same house for nearly 30 years and they are paying the same amount of property tax now as they were 30 years ago. Their kids have moved out of state because they cannot afford to live there, but they have a nice home now (all paid for and really low

 

[TrainTrac]

Seriously, all of these fit into my "cannot use" catagory. And the only reason I used coal miner is because, off the top of my head, I couldn't think of anyone that works harder.

Once again, an example of only physical labor being considered hard work.



So are you saying that the people in the aforementioned list don't work hard? I'd say that they had to work pretty damn hard to get to where they are today, and on that list. It may not be back-breaking, calloused handed work, but it still takes hard work to become a millionaire, let alone a billionaire. Most of the people mentioned on that list are heads of companies, a job which bears a tremendous amount of pressure, responsibility, and accountability, and a great deal of stress. Hard work indeed.

 

[John Draper]

So are you saying that the people in the aforementioned list don't work hard?

No I am not, and it really has nothing to do with the argument, either you are not following the argument or you are reading stuff into it. The argument started with the following comment:

However, to do it you need hard work and most of the time now you need an education.

Which I had taken to mean that all you have to do is work hard and get an education.

Meaning NO OTHER VARIABLES CAN ENTER INTO THIS EQUATION. To explain further: no inheritance, can't marry into it, can't be due to connections, can't be luck, ect. In other words it/they MUST follow the original quote and ONLY the original quote. See my first post in this tread! HTH

 

[John Draper]

Sorry I got side tracked.

He's a Republican in name only. He's definately not the same type of Republican the last Actor/Govenor of California was.

If I remember correctly, when he first won the election, Republicans (at least those that I work with) were clammering about changing the constitution so he could run for President (after Bush's term was up, of course). so what did I miss? what happened? I know that in order to "get things done" he was becoming more flexible towards the "girly men".



I agree with you on the "gun control situation", no argument from me there. Being originally from New York, I can certainly understand your fustrations. Got my carry permit after moving to Florida, and I think is necessary these days (but that may be more of my "pessimistic rationalization" ).



But I don't think you are going to win anyone over (not that you are trying to) by using Kommie or commie. These are the type of things that are causing polarization. Which I don't think is a good thing. Also, it has become like a clichè to call anyone who are politically left, communists. Which is kind of amusing as our founding fathers were not only considered liberals, but radical liberals. If the conservatives (tories) had the numbers (power) in the late 1700's we would have been flying the British Union Jack a lot longer then we did.



To make a point, check out a picture that was brought in to my work area for funnies. Since I find it offensive, I would think you would also.



As promised, picture was removed. It was a picture of GW depicting an almost perfect posture of a nazi salute, arm raised, fingers fully extended ect.



If anyone finds this offensive I will delete it, I will probably delete it anyway as I find it offensive. But I need it to make a point.

 

[TomT]

I don't find it offensive at all. Bush likes to use his hands when he talks. The camera simply caught him using a hand jester that only people who are looking for something offensive would notice.

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

Republicans (at least those that I work with) were clammering about changing the constitution so he could run for President

I heard mostly media hype on that one. Anyone worth a hill of beans know that would be a BIG MISTAKE and would NEVER happen. We have 300,000,000 people in this country, more than 2/3's are natural citizens. Surely we can find atleast 1 in the 200,000,000 or so natural citizens who can do the job. Again, it was mostly a media thing, imagine that. The guy is pretty liberal so of course the media likes him, just like Mr. McCain.

Also, it has become like a clichè to call anyone who are politically left, communists

Considering that I never said this I'll take your arguement with a LARGE grain of salt. I have no problem with leftists. I think they are wrong on virtually every topic, especially social issues, but that's not the arguement. I don't call people who live in Kommiefornia Kommiforniaists, though it has a nice ring to it..... Hmmmm.... Nancy Kommieforniaist Pelosi....



I will continue to call the PRK Kommifornia. I'm sorry if you don't like it or it "seems" polorizing. I get really tired of East and West costers ignoring the other 30+ states that don't touch either the Atlantic or Pacific and calling us "backwoods" or ask "who in their right minds wants to live in flyover country?". Yes, those are actual quotes. When these statements are quelled, we see if PRK or Kommiefornia stops. Probably not since Kommiefornia is much more like China than what the founding fathers ever intended to see. Kommiefornia is a Communist state, or at least as close as a "representational democracy" can be. Plain and simple. New York (New Joke, New Spork, New Toke, etc) and Massachusits (Maddatdemshits, Massatwoshits, Massadumbshits, etc) are nearly there as well. Been there, have the t-shirt. No thanks. I like my Class III friendly state. At least my representative has lived in my state longer than 6months longer he has been a representative (see Hitlery).

I don't find it offensive at all. Bush likes to use his hands when he talks. The camera simply caught him using a hand jester that only people who are looking for something offensive would notice.

Ditto. Why bother to post this type of trash anyway? I guess when you take a picture of the soldiers guarding the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at the right time, you could say that they were practicing to be part of the Nazi SS as well....



Let me remind the leftists of two things they need to keep in mind. There was an organization that did the following, can you name them?

-Registered, then later confiscated all personal firearms

-Deemed all religion as devisive and against the promotion of the State, thereby illegal.

-Killed off all the "unproductive" members of society



They were of course the Nazis....

-Nanci Pelosi and friends want ZERO private firearm ownership

-Nanci Pelosi and friends (especially the Kommiforniaists that she associates with) want God out of the government, period.

-Nanci Pelosi advocates for the destruction of children in the womb and thinks that doctor-assisted suicide is A-OK....



I think the world has seen this type of drive before.... but I just can't put my finger on where or when.....

 

[John Draper]

I don't find it offensive at all. Bush likes to use his hands when he talks. The camera simply caught him using a hand jester that only people who are looking for something offensive would notice

Tom,



When I read you post, I swear, as God is my witness, tears came to my eyes.



Rarely do I mention anything to anyone about their spelling, mostly because my own spelling/typing is not all that good either. But this one I cannot resist.



Jester - fool, clown, ect. ect



Gesture - a motion of the limbs made to express thought or to emphasize speech.



Actually that could be quite profound - hand puppet perhaps?



Either this is a Freudian slip (which means that you could be a closet or latent liberal)

or you did this on purpose as you were trying to inflict bodily harm upon me by causing me to laugh so hard that I would fall out of my chair. If it is the latter, you were almost successful.



I really don't think that Mr. Shek needs your or Trains help. He seems to me to be a very smart man and also very, very perceptive. Example: I think he knew that I am not very fond of trickery, deception or preying on the gullible; even before I did.



So my picture and last post was mostly directed to him. Others may need more details to the point of exasperation.



So to add the details: the person that brought the picture in was a liberal. If that does not help, how about this?



Multiple choice:



He brought the picture in because:



A. It was an extremely pretty picture suitable for frameing



B. He is madly in love with George W and collects as many pictures of him as he can, and

shows them around



C. He is a liberal and thinks of George W as a facist, he was showing the picture around

because he thought it was funny as it depicted the president as giving a nazi salute



In multiple choice questions, the longer answer is usually the correct one (unless a pro has created the question).



About 20 people have seen this picture in my office. Most of them laughed except one of the most conservative persons I have ever run into. He didn't laugh, he got the frog face (Frog face: eyes bulging, clenched jaw ect).



To your favor: had I been leafing through a mag. I probably wouldn't have notice it either. However the key words were:

check out a picture that was brought into my work area for funnies

Now for the reason I became offended:



First, there is no doubt in my mind that this picture was made by a professional photographer

reason: no one else could have gotten that close to the president even if he had a long lens.



Two, since this is a professional the camera simply didn't just catch him, professionals don't simply just catch. In fact I am pretty sure that this moment was waited for as it was near perfect, arm raised, fingers extended ect.



Three, since I am convinced that this was done on purpose, it is deceptive and was probably done for monetary purposes without any regard to ethics.



If you and Trac were trying to "gang up" on me; as I said Mr. Shek is a very smart man and if there is a flaw in my argument I am quite sure he will catch it. I don't mind however, if anyone wants to join the fray with responses like those......I need all the help I can get. :lol:

 

[John Draper]

Considering that I never said this I'll take your arguement with a LARGE grain of salt.

This is true, but I felt it was implied. You did not apply those types of derogatory comments to any person or persons, but rather a place. At least not until your last post.:lol:

New York (New Joke, New Spork, New Toke, etc) and Massachusits (Maddatdemshits, Massatwoshits, Massadumbshits, etc) are nearly there as well. Been there, have the t-shirt. No thanks. I like my Class III friendly state. At least my representative has lived in my state longer than 6months longer he has been a representative (see Hitlery).

:lol:



You are funny, I have to admit. Not knocking your spelling, just wondered as I have a feeling the Hitlery was spelled that way on purpose. Plus, wasn't both Hillary and Bubba both governors of the state you seem to be so fond of?

Let me remind the leftists of two things they need to keep in mind. There was an organization that did the following, can you name them?

-Registered, then later confiscated all personal firearms

-Deemed all religion as devisive and against the promotion of the State, thereby illegal.

-Killed off all the "unproductive" members of society



They were of course the Nazis....

-Nanci Pelosi and friends want ZERO private firearm ownership

-Nanci Pelosi and friends (especially the Kommiforniaists that she associates with) want God out of the government, period.

-Nanci Pelosi advocates for the destruction of children in the womb and thinks that doctor-assisted suicide is A-OK....

Sounds a lot like the old Soviet Union as well. For some reason, I can't seem to put these two together.



Fascism - A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism. (Webster’s) Please don't tell me that "Webster’s" is part of the liberal media.



Guess mainly my point is that some conservatives have been calling liberals: commies, Conrad, communists, socialists for years, even decades. So this is nothing new.



What seems to be comparatively new is liberals calling conservatives; fascists, and it seems to be getting more prevalent all the time.



Perhaps you can explain to me what good, if any, could possibly come from this.



We are all Americans with the right of free speech and free thought, I am sure that there is room for both views in this country, preferably without name calling.

 

[John Draper]

Shek, OK, I got it now, took me long enough Hitlery = Hitler + Hillary.



You scoundrel you, ya got me all confused.



I think that in order to keep any meaningful discussion going, that is if you care to.



We need a few definitions that we can agree upon. Especially those concerning ideology.



Far right = super conservative = fascist



Far left = super liberal = communist or socialist



Examples: Hitler and Mussolini were fascists;

Stalin, Mao and Castro were communists.



What say you?



So with that in mind, implying that Nanci and Hillary are fascists, when they are both considered "left of center" would not make much sense.



Also this;

Let me remind the leftists of two things they need to keep in mind. There was an organization that did the following, can you name them?

-Registered, then later confiscated all personal firearms

-Deemed all religion as devisive and against the promotion of the State, thereby illegal.

-Killed off all the "unproductive" members of society



They were of course the Nazis....

-Nanci Pelosi and friends want ZERO private firearm ownership

-Nanci Pelosi and friends (especially the Kommiforniaists that she associates with) want God out of the government, period.

-Nanci Pelosi advocates for the destruction of children in the womb and thinks that doctor-assisted suicide is A-OK....

in my mind, has more to do with a dictatorship than it does any ideology.