Forum Post: An honest question
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 5, 2011, 12:23 p.m. EST by SeeingClearly
(0)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Is it possible to have a rational discussion regarding these issues?
How does protesting against "income inequality" differ from jealousy?
It's simple: jealousy means that you want to strip the other person of what they have, and once you get your hands on it the hell you'll share it with anyone else. Complaining about income inequality means that you want to make sure anyone here makes enough money to live a decent life. It means that as the poor man or the working class man you demand better wages so you can live with dignity and comfort, but it also means that if you do make it into the professional class you remember where you came from and look out for the poor man even if it costs you a fair amount to do so.
I don't think perfect equality is even possible, but we sure as hell can achieve more equality. Productivity has increased in every sector since the 1970's, but this increase in wealth has not been spread out among everyone. Why is it too much to ask for the rich to get richer and poor get richer at the same time? How is it possible that a CEO can still receive a bonus when their company is not profitable? How can the income of the extremely wealthy go up 40 fold while the rest of the incomes have been stagnant or even have decreased for some occupations? There may be some people who haven't contributed to society, but for the most part, everyone has contributed in some way to this surplus. That's the issue. The wealthy should be able to become wealthy, but is it too much to ask that maybe some of them can take 100 million dollars instead of 1 billion? Or maybe instead of that giant bonus, they take a little less to keep people employed. Lets be honest here, laying people off is not going entirely to company profits, but is rewarding the people who decided to lay them off. I am all for remaining profitable, but if we want to call this a "Capitalist" country, then profits need to go into capital, not a few people's pockets. These CEO's do not add any capital to the corporation, the corporate shareholders and the employees do. I'm not here to bash all CEO's because they do provide a service by delegating responsibilities, but are they that important? Does a CEO of a bank making 10 million dollars really contribute more to society than an Engineer making 60k/year? Does anyone really think about this? It takes great management skills to keep hundreds or sometimes thousands of people working together, but the CEO's didn't do any of that work themselves. They are merely organizers. People want to talk down on entitlements for food, health care and education, but never even question the entitlements that many of the wealthy enjoy. A 10 million dollar bonus is an entitlement and the man at the top did not burn one additional calorie to earn that; the people he controls earned that and it should be distributed among everyone who worked their asses off for it.
We are protesting against a system that allows corporations and banks to shovel money at politicians. Those politicians then rig the game to favor their bosses. Tax loopholes, bailouts, fraudulent contracts.
Who does a politician care more about? The guy who can give him one vote or the guy who can secretly raise a million dollars for a PAC that can spend it to support that candidate? Whose concerns get listened to?
How badly has our economic system been damaged by this pay to play scheme? The .01% at the top have made tons of money through outsourcing jobs, gov contracts, and tax refunds.
That's right. Some of the most profitable companies in the US pat no taxes and even get credits so that they get checks from the government at the end of the year.
Who pays for that? You do. Meanwhile, any policy that would actually help the working and middle classes is rejected outright or turned into a privatized system that helps no one except the corporation that gets the contract.
This undemocratic sham of a representive republic is the one and only reason that income for regular people has been largely stagnant while while it has shot up exponentially for CEOs and the richest fragment of Americans
it is about big money manipulating the laws and lawmakers of this country.
it is about irresponsible actions by large investment firms at the taxpayers expense.
jealousy is a much different issue but of course you can spin as you see fit.
"Is it possible to have a rational discussion regarding these issues?"
With some people it is, with others it isn't. Hopefully more and more people will learn how to have rational discussions. Teach by example i'd say ;)
"How does protesting against "income inequality" differ from jealousy?"
Jealousy is based on your own needs and wants. Income inequality is about the needs and wants of the whole society.