Quote from: Arriemoller on April 24, 2021, 10:42:39 PM

Quote from: DaRude on April 24, 2021, 06:59:13 PM

Quote from: rolling on April 24, 2021, 02:39:58 PM

Quote from: DaRude on April 24, 2021, 02:01:05 AM

Quote from: rolling on April 24, 2021, 12:16:13 AM

Quote from: DaRude on April 23, 2021, 11:59:23 PM

Quote from: Arriemoller on April 23, 2021, 11:09:00 PM

10 friends go out every day for dinner. The bill would be SEK 1,000. The bill was divided in the same way that taxes are paid. The first four - (the poorest) pay nothing; - the 5th pays SEK 10 - the 6th pays SEK 30 - the 7th SEK 70 - the 8th SEK 120 - the 9th SEK 180 - The 10th person (the richest) pays SEK 590.
The ten friends ate dinner at the restaurant every day, happy with the deal. Until one day, when the owner of the restaurant gave them a discount. “You are such good customers. I give you SEK 200 off your dinners. ” Dinner for 10 people now costs SEK 800.

They still wanted to pay for the dinner the way taxes are paid in Sweden. The first four people were not affected. They were allowed to continue eating for free. But what would the other 6 do - those who paid? How would they divide the discount of SEK 200 so that everyone would get their share? They realized that SEK 200 divided by 6 would be SEK 33.33. But if they deducted it from each person's share, the 5th and 6th person would be paid to eat. The restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each person's bill proportionately. He calculated the amounts each person would pay:

The result was that the 5th person also got to eat for free - the 6th had to pay SEK 20 - the 7th paid SEK 50 - the 8th SEK 90 - the 9th SEK 120 - the 10th person paid SEK 520 instead of the previous SEK 590. Everyone got a lower price than before and now the first five could eat for free. Outside the restaurant, they began to compare what they had saved. "I only earned a tenth of the discount!", The 6th person began. He pointed to the 10th person, "… but he earned 70 kroner !!!" - "Exactly, I also only saved ten", said the 5th person. "It's unfair that he got seven times as much as I did!"
"It's true!" Shouted the 7th person. “Why should he get SEK 70 back when I only got SEK 20? The rich always gets the most! ”-“ Wait a minute ”, shouted the first four,“ We got nothing! This system exploits us poor! ”

The nine people scolded the 10th and called him a cold-hearted egoist, a capitalist pig, a bloodsucker who kicks those who lie down. The next night, the 10th person didn't come to dinner. The other nine said " how nice", sat down and ate. When the bill came, they discovered something. They couldn't pay it. SEK 520 was missing.

10th friend owns all 9 houses his friend live in and collects rent from them. He has more total wealth than his other 9 friends combined. On top of that every year 10th friend amasses more and more % of over all wealth, as the other nine own less and less. So the other 9 friends get together and say remember how things were more even with the tax rate 30yrs ago? Yeah lets make sure not come back to that as current trend is totally sustainable, instead let's just blame the friend who's poorer then you. 10th friend doesn't do anything and just buys more land

Plot twist, back in high school, 9 friends screwed around smoking weed all day and gave the 10th friend wedgies for always doing his homework on time. Now they are all grown up and they want to go back to how things were 30 years ago when they weren't such losers. They want to fuck around and make their hard working friend pay for it.

Taking stuff away from successful people to give it to less successful people is called socialism. Just because you can beat someone up and take their money doesn't mean it's a good way to run a society. It's immoral and has never worked in any country that has tried it. It doesn't help the poor people, it just hurts the rich people. Poor people will always be poor because they don't know how to be rich or are just unmotivated.

You seem to be missing my argument so let me spell it out. I'm saying that, we have a runaway unsustainable indicator, wealth distribution is flashing red, we're at historical levels we've never been before, and trend continues in the wrong direction.

1st level resposes- It's not an issue, despite the fact that overall population is more educated then ever before, poor people are just lazy druggies, lets push the pedal to the metal. Anyone proposing solution to freeze distribution disparity at current levels or god forbid attempt to bring it back in line with what it was in the 70s is a dirty red commie bastard, and better be dead than red. <-- this is the group you seem to fall into

2nd level-yes it's an issue but we still have some wiggle room and the situation is not as dire as you make it out to be. We believe in solution X and are willing to keep the current trend hostage, keep the trend going until 1% owns Y% of total wealth or our solution is adopted

...or maybe those are very narrow and short sighted categorizations that very few people fit into. The issue is more complicated. I think you know that and are just playing dumb to justify the socialist talking points.

The bottom 50% of humans currently have more wealth that any other time in history. The ones with a socialist agenda are using "wealth inequality" as a rallying cry to push their agenda which will tear down what the world has achieved. They use other rallying cries such as racism, sexism, hatred, etc. The goal is the same. Tear down our current system and build a new system (socialism) where everyone is "equal in outcome" despite their individual talents or efforts.

This is not a new thing. Societies have tried socialism over and over throughout history because it seems like the "fair" thing to do and it has always failed miserably. It's pure evil and you should be ashamed to be a part of it.

A wildly successful economy will have some wildly successful people and that should be celebrated rather than attacked. Nobody is building citadels. Most of that wealth sits in the companies everyone works for and benefits from.

The agenda you're pushing will not achieve what you think it will. The more likely outcome is collapse of the system that everyone is benefiting from.

It's not your fault you think like you do. I'm sure some well intentioned people thought they were doing you a favor by teaching you what they did, but it's a deeply flawed ideology. At some point you have to start thinking for yourself instead of just regurgitating the socialist talking points without any other analysis or insight.

Ah so instead of addressing the main issue, explaining how wealth inequality trend is sustainable and won't become an issue until 0.1% of ultra wealthy will own 99.X% of overall wealth, you once again childishly try to belittle and pivot the argument into a deadlock by character association? You add no value, ignored. Have a nice day

Your argument is a straw man argument, First, the 1% is constantly changing, it's not the same few people sitting and getting increasingly richer.
Most of the top percent is old folks selling all they own and moving in to a retirement home, they stay in the top for a very short time and are then replaced by new people.
Secondly, it's not a problem. The fact that a few people are very wealthy doesn't mean that everybody else is poor. "The bottom 50% of humans currently have more wealth that any other time in history".
Some people getting richer than others is not a problem, in fact it's the opposite, if Elon M weren't allowed to get filthy rich, there would not be any SpaceX and no coming bases on the moon and mars for example.

Really? lower 50% now own more land/resources than ever before? Cause this is a bitcoin forum and surely you wouldn't try to deceive by measuring "wealth" of lower 50% in absolute 2021 US dollars now would you?

Well, then why have brackets for everything else and leave 20% cap gain static for ultra wealthy, what makes it such a perfectly balanced number? Why was it fine at 35% in the 70s but now only a dirty commie would suggest bumping it to 21%? Following your logic on how filthy rich are more efficient than poor, then it'll be logical to raise taxes on poor and middle class (seriously they'll never get us to Mars) and lower it for ultra rich? Then just hope really really hard that out of hundreds of billionaires that spend their money on hookers and blow and writing their names to be seen from space (as their rightfully should, it's their damn money Angry

, new idea for Bob?) the next one hopefully turns out like Musk and decides to find cure for cancer?