I drink your milkshake! a metaphor for capitalism

rickyb

Well-Known Member
you're desperately clinging to your numbers to suit your debbie downer narrative.
the truth hurts. it doesnt have to, but it does quite often

i just google articles on stock market ownership and i accept what i read. it was the first article i pulled up. should i show you some more top results on stock market ownership in america or are you satisfied by the first result i gave you?
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
you're desperately clinging to your numbers to suit your debbie downer narrative.
top 1% have 53x more stock than the bottom 50%

1746277150290.png

 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
I'm still waiting for your truth.
"Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinions of others and hesitate to tell the truth that is in us, and from motives of policy are silent when we should speak, the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls"

 

oldngray

nowhere special
"Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinions of others and hesitate to tell the truth that is in us, and from motives of policy are silent when we should speak, the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls"

Occupy has nothing to do with Christianity.

Try harder next time.
 

newfie

Well-Known Member
"Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinions of others and hesitate to tell the truth that is in us, and from motives of policy are silent when we should speak, the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls"

what did elizabeth say about ignoring the complete truth to make a narrow argument?
 

newfie

Well-Known Member

rickyb

Well-Known Member
so were ok with human slavery and the high rate of murder and theft at the lower levels as long we focus this discussion on stock market ownership only?
were talking about what reagan said and how IF what he said was related to stock market ownership then its a failure on that level too.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
they cant.

and even if they could that still wouldnt really change the fact about 10% owning 90% of stock because that 10% gets so much more money.
10% owning so much stock because they are business owners who receive the stock when they incorporate their business. Up to them to make business succeed so that they can list stock on an exchange which allows others to buy stock from them directly in an IPO(Initial Public Offering). That stock is then traded on the exchange.

You seem to have the idea that wealthy.people have bought.up most of the stock for themselves. Business owners who've incorporated and are listed on an exchange keep enough of their stock to be the controlling owner in the company. So again, you've demonstrated a lack of understanding of how the system works.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
it was clinton. he is the one blamed.

View attachment 518989
maybe this is too right wing for right wingers?

View attachment 518990
Clinton may have signed it into law in the United States but the agreement between Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. was signed by the presidents and prime minister of the three countries in 1992. And Clinton signed a bill passed by Congress that was controlled by the Democrats at the time.
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
10% owning so much stock because they are business owners who receive the stock when they incorporate their business. Up to them to make business succeed so that they can list stock on an exchange which allows others to buy stock from them directly in an IPO(Initial Public Offering). That stock is then traded on the exchange.

You seem to have the idea that wealthy.people have bought.up most of the stock for themselves. Business owners who've incorporated and are listed on an exchange keep enough of their stock to be the controlling owner in the company. So again, you've demonstrated a lack of understanding of how the system works.
im just quoting the articles which align with what ive heard from economists.

so are you saying business ownership is quite concentrated then? this goes back to what reagan might have been saying.

ive heard alot about monopolies these days
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
Clinton may have signed it into law in the United States but the agreement between Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. was signed by the presidents and prime minister of the three countries in 1992. And Clinton signed a bill passed by Congress that was controlled by the Democrats at the time.
i see that too.

so anyways we shouldnt give clinton a pass on nafta. he definitely could have done something about it based on what i read.

1746288829204.png
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
im just quoting the articles which align with what ive heard from economists.

so are you saying business ownership is quite concentrated then? this goes back to what reagan might have been saying.

ive heard alot about monopolies these days
Business ownership is from people taking their savings and starting a small business and growing it. Along the way as they grow they create jobs which allows their employees to pay their bills and have a life. It's not intrinsically evil to do this. There are business owners who are greedy and exploit their employees for sure. Those people often fail in the end. But most business is about someone seeing a need for good or services that others want and they fill that need, creating wealth for themselves and others if they are smart about running their business.

If you go to your average supermarket.you'll see products from huge conglomerates and products from small family run businesses. The supermarket itself is a business that brings all those products together in one place making it easy for the public to buy what they need or just want. This isn't rocket science.

You would disrupt this by having some great council of employees deciding how everything is done. Well who is going to do the grunt work no one likes to do? Who is going to get up early in the morning and drive the truck from the warehouse to the supermarket? Who is going to work in the warehouse or stock shelves? All employees being equal means no one is managing everything, coordinating everything. If you say someone can be assigned to do that but he's not going to be paid any more than the truck driver or the stock clerk then he'll say why did I go to college to learn all of this if I'm not being paid more than the guy who stocks shelves? The system falls apart because of lack of incentive to do better. This is exactly what happened in communist countries who tried to be communist only. China has succeeded as a communist country because they allowed capitalism to be practiced. It's what works.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
i see that too.

so anyways we shouldnt give clinton a pass on nafta. he definitely could have done something about it based on what i read.

View attachment 519025
You don't seem to understand politics. People believed back then that NAFTA would work out better for everyone. If Clinton had vetoed the bill the veto would have likely been overridden. If it had it would have weakened Clinton and hurt his chances for reelection. And for getting his liberal agenda passed. As was his liberal agenda caused him to lose Congress in the midterms and thus his shift to the right to get reelected.
 
Top