When The Aristocracy Leaves The Commoners In The Dust, The Empire Is Doomed

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
i'd rather be rich with life..it's not all about $$$$$$..you come into this world and leave the same way..alone, wealthy moron..while the cancer eats away at your prostate, you grasp for anything..everything..a shell of what you once were, cut apart..chemically treated (it exudes from your pores and smells like death although no one will tell you) and the agony..i get to be 105..grandma is still driving at 98 in nofla..her mom drove until she was 100 and passed at 105.

my stem cells are worth their weight in gold:wink:
Cancer is gone, PSA is 1.3, thanks for asking. ;)

.....and we are sitting on 6 digit investments and plenty of money in the bank.

Do you have any investments?

There are and have been many an immigrant or simple man who in the last 10 - 30 years have made it big financially. Never watched Shark Tank? West Texas Investors Club? All of those successes were made by people with little to no money who had guts, motivation, and drive. These old friends were competitors with each other in West Texas selling oil field equipment, joined up and now listening to those with a dream of making something of themselves.

Set deep in the heart of Texas, the 2016 eight-episode series features self-made multimillionaires Rooster McConaughey and Butch Gilliam who have chosen to pass on their success by investing in promising entrepreneurs – but only on their turf and their terms. Along with their close friend and confidante Gil Prather, Rooster and Butch invite ambitious entrepreneurs from across the country to come down to Midland, Texas and make their case.


http://www.cnbcprime.com/west-texas/

This excuse of "golden age of capitalism" is just a loser's cop-out.

You only have yourself to blame for your misery.
 
Last edited:

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
My grandmother lived to within 6 weeks of her 105th. I'm terrified for my retirement!
people that retire, usually become fucking bored..with the exception of 2 short term consulting assignments i've done nothing but bring suit against idiots..winning each and every time in the last 5 years since leaving kushy fortune 500 (besides school of course).

the key is to never truly retire..same concept as when one person dies, the remaining husband/wife usually goes shortly thereafter if they had a decent relationship.

you keep the love affair going and it keeps you going..everyone needs to be needed otherwise you die of a broken heart.
 
Last edited:

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
people that retire, usually become fucking bored..with the exception of 2 short term consulting assignments i've done nothing but bring suit against idiots..winning each and every time in the last 5 years since leaving kushy fortune 500 (besides school of course).

the key is to never truly retire..same concept as when one person, dies the remaining husband/wife usually goes shortly thereafter if they had a decent relationship.

you keep the love affair going and it keeps you going..everyone needs to be needed otherwise you die of a broken heart.
Yeah, well I guess some people's definition of retirement is different from other's- or mine. I'm the kind of person who thrives in the pursuit of some worthy goal or cause. I know better than to give up that passion, because my zest for life would go with it...
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Cancer is gone, PSA is 1.3, thanks for asking. ;)

.....and we are sitting on 6 digit investments and plenty of money in the bank.

Do you have any investments?

There are and have been many an immigrant or simple man who in the last 10 - 30 years have made it big financially. Never watched Shark Tank? West Texas Investors Club? All of those successes were made by people with little to no money who had guts, motivation, and drive. These old friends were competitors with each other in West Texas selling oil field equipment, joined up and now listening to those with a dream of making something of themselves.

Set deep in the heart of Texas, the 2016 eight-episode series features self-made multimillionaires Rooster McConaughey and Butch Gilliam who have chosen to pass on their success by investing in promising entrepreneurs – but only on their turf and their terms. Along with their close friend and confidante Gil Prather, Rooster and Butch invite ambitious entrepreneurs from across the country to come down to Midland, Texas and make their case.


http://www.cnbcprime.com/west-texas/

This excuse of "golden age of capitalism" is just a loser's cop-out.

You only have yourself to blame for your misery.
damn! i'm good!..it'll be back:wink:

i'm not in misery..don't you get it?..i didn't need to spend 27 years of misery like you, only to become an out of touch old geezer with a rotting weenie and tons of money, i can't take with me.

i'm young, have my health, get to call the shots..all my shots..don't have to make sure it's 'okay' with anyone nor babysit them and their narcissistic paranoid delusional anxieties.

i love me, actually.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
New game. Any time UncleBen hits one of the FBI's extremist traits, you have to take a shot!

You'll be hammered in no time!


Character assassination

Extremists often attack the character of an opponent rather than deal with the facts or issues raised. They will question motives, qualifications, past associations, alleged values, personality, looks, and mental health as a diversion from the issues under consideration.

Name calling and labeling

Extremists are quick to resort to taunts (e.g., pervert, racist, and crackpot) to label and condemn opponents and to divert others from listening to their arguments.

Irresponsive sweeping generalizations

Extremists tend to make sweeping claims or judgments with little to no evidence, often confusing similarity with sameness. That is, they assume that because two or more things are alike in some respects that they are alike in all respects.

Inadequate proof behind assertions

Extremists tend to be very fuzzy about what constitutes proof for their assertions and tend to get caught up in logical fallacies where they assume that a prior event explains a subsequent occurrence simply because of their before-and-after relationship. They tend to project wished-for conclusions and exaggerate the significance of information that confirms their prejudices and discredit or ignore information that contradicts them.

Tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil

Extremists feel that their opponents hold differing views because they are bad, immoral, dishonest, hateful, cruel, prejudiced, etc. and not merely because they simply disagree, see matters differently, or are mistaken.

Dualism worldview

Extremists tend to see the world in terms of absolute good and evil, for them or against them, with no middle ground or intermediate position. All issues are ultimately moral issues of right and wrong, good or bad, with the right and good positions coinciding with their interests. Their slogan is often “Those who are not with me are against me.”

Tendency to argue by intimidation

Extremists tend to frame their arguments in such a way as to intimidate others into accepting their premises and conclusions. To disagree with them is to ally oneself with the devil or to give aid and comfort to the enemy. They tend to be very judgmental and moralizing, allowing them to define the parameters of the debate by keeping their opponents on the defensive.

Use of slogans, buzzwords, and thought-stopping clichés

For many extremists, shortcuts in thinking and in reasoning matters out seem necessary to avoid troublesome facts and compelling counterarguments. Simple slogans substitute for more complex abstractions.

Assumption of moral superiority over others

The most obvious assumptions are claims of racial or ethnic superiority—a master race. Less obvious are claims of ennoblement because of alleged victimhood, a special relationship with God, or membership in a special or elite class and a kind of aloof high-minded snobbishness that accrues because of the weightiness of their preoccupations, their altruism, and their willingness to sacrifice themselves (and others) to their cause.

Doomsday thinking

Extremists often predict dire or catastrophic consequences from a situation or from a failure to follow a specific course, and they tend to exhibit a kind of crisis-mindedness. It can be a Communist takeover, a Nazi revival, nuclear war, earthquakes, floods, or the wrath of God. Whatever it is, it is just around the corner unless we follow their program and listen to their special insight and wisdom, to which only the truly enlightened have access. For extremists, any setback or defeat is the beginning of the end.

Belief that it’s okay to do bad things in the service of a “good” cause

Extremists may deliberately lie or otherwise distort, misquote, slander, defame, or libel their opponents and/or critics; engage in censorship or repression; or undertake violence in special cases. This is done with little or no remorse as long as it is in the service of defeating the Communists, Fascists, or whomever. Defeating an enemy becomes an all-encompassing goal to which other values are subordinate. With extremists, the end justifies the means.

Tendency to personalize hostility

Extremists often wish for the personal bad fortune of their enemies and celebrate when it occurs. When a critic or an adversary dies or has a serious illness, a bad accident, or personal legal problems, extremists often rejoice and chortle about how he or she deserved it. For example, right-wing extremists celebrated the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., and leftists agonized because George Wallace survived an assassination attempt. In each instance, their hatred was not only directed against ideas, but also against individual human beings.

Emphasis on emotional responses, less so on reasoning and logical analysis

Extremists have an unspoken reverence for propaganda, which they may call education or consciousness-raising. Symbolism plays an exaggerated role in their thinking, and they tend to think imprecisely and metaphorically. Effective extremists tend to be effective propagandists. Propaganda differs from education in that the former teaches one what to think, and the latter teaches one how to think clearly.

Hypersensitivity and vigilance

Extremists perceive hostile innuendo in even casual and innocuous comments,imagine rejection and antagonism concealed in honest disagreement and dissent, and see latent subversion, anti-Semitism, perversion, racism, disloyalty, and so on in innocent gestures and ambiguous behaviors. Although few extremists are actually clinically paranoid, many of them adopt a paranoid style with its attendant projective mechanisms, hostility, and distrust.

Use of supernatural rationales for beliefs and actions

Some extremists, particularly those involved in cults and religious movements, claim some kind of supernatural rationale for their beliefs and actions; their movement or cause, they believe, is ordained or looked upon favorably by God.

Advocacy of double standards

Extremists generally tend to judge themselves or their interest group in terms of their intentions, which they tend to view generously, and their critics and opponents by their acts, which they tend to view very critically. They would like you to accept their assertions on faith, but they demand proof for yours.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/12/the-wealthiest-dozen-americans-own-more-than-the-bottom-half.html

The wealthiest dozen Americans own more than the bottom half
Shocking new report on wealth inequality actually understates the truth
December 2, 2015 2:00AM ET
by David Cay Johnston

A report out today provides a powerful image that will help people understand how extreme concentration of wealth has become in America — an issue at the core of our economic, political and social woes over the past 35 years.

“America’s 20 wealthiest people — a group that could fit comfortably in one single Gulfstream G650 luxury jet — now own more wealth than the bottom half” of Americans, according to the report, by Chuck Collins and Josh Hoxie, both veteran analysts of inequality in America.

But there’s a big problem with that memorable image: It seriously understates just how much wealth these 20 people have.

Probably just 12 or 15 of those at the top own as much as America’s worst-off 160 million people. That’s about $732 billion on each side of that equation. For the top 20, it averages $36 billion each; for the bottom half, $4,575 each.

Wealth and influence
The intense concentration of wealth matters because it makes the economy less efficient, discouraging investments that create jobs while giving a relative handful of superrich Americans vast sway over the agendas that politicians pursue.

Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, provided nearly half the contributions to the presidential candidates in both parties, though giving was heavily skewed to Republicans.

The result is policies that take from the many and redistribute to the already rich few through stealth techniques that rarely make the news but can be found in the public record. Among these policies are a failure to enforce the laws of business competition, severe restrictions on unions and subsidies galore for big companies.

Five years ago, the 400 households reporting the largest incomes on their tax returns captured an astonishing 6 percent of all the increased income in America, as I revealed a year ago. Such massive inequality reflects not market economics but political influence that tilts the economic playing field.

And because of their political influence, those at the very top get tax favors, especially the deferral of taxes into the distant future, which transforms the burden of taxes into a bonanza of increased profits.

If you wonder why Washington doesn’t seem to fix problems that affect most Americans, this is the answer: Politicians take care of the hands that feed them, the donor class.

In an era when so many voters are easily swayed with angry rhetoric, made-up facts and slick marketing of policies that sound great but actually hurt the vast majority, most politicians pay no price for catering to the richest of the rich at the expense of the many.

Secret wealth
Wealth at the top is much more concentrated than Collins and Hoxie report, because we have only weak and incomplete measures of wealth. And we let people choose how to value their wealth.

Is an asset worth what was paid for it (known as basis) or its value after depreciation or its fair market value today? A smart owner picks basis when dealing with tax appraisers but market value when seeking loans. We let people simultaneously pose as poorer to the taxman and wealthier to their bankers.

The Collins and Hoxie analysis of top wealth was based on the latest Forbes 400, a promotional vehicle for America’s leading wealth-porn magazine. I devour every issue — and not just to feast my eyes on its charticles.

But the Forbes list is based mostly on disclosures about publicly traded stock, largely ignoring investments in other stocks and bonds as well as many other side businesses owned by those at the top.

Over the years, I have interviewed more than a dozen people whose wealth should put them on the Forbes 400 list, on the basis of public records on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission and at county courthouses, where land title, divorce and other records are often filed. None of these people have ever been mentioned in Forbes, however, in any article.

The list would be different if Forbes had a way to get at more privately held companies, analyzed more real estate records or could get a peek at the brokerage accounts of the superwealthy (or in some cases the banks they own).

Buffett’s billions
Counted or not by Forbes, the billionaires gather up mountains of dividends, royalties, interest and capital gains each year, making their wealth snowball apart from the companies they are best known for leading.

Forbes 400 leaders such as Bill Gates (No. 1) and Larry Ellison (No. 3) have sold huge amounts of stock over the years and used it to buy other assets not counted in the Forbes listings.

Gates’ second fortune is owned through his Cascade Investments LLC, which has large stakes in a more than a dozen big companies, including a major military boat builder, the Four Seasons luxury hotel chain and Republic Industries, a trash-hauling company. Forbes counts Gates’ second fortune, but those of many others are not so obvious.

Consider Warren Buffett, perennial No. 2 on the Forbes list of richest Americans. Forbes’ latest list shows his wealth as the value of his stake in Berkshire Hathaway, the Omaha, Nebraska, holding company that pays him a $100,000 annual salary.

But when Buffett disclosed data from his 2010 income tax return, it showed $62.8 million of income. More than $40 million of it was long-term capital gains and dividends, yet Buffett sold no Berkshire Hathaway shares, and the company pays no dividends. That tells us he has a second large fortune apart from Berkshire Hathaway.

He deducted about $16 million in investment interest, suggesting leveraged assets of perhaps $800 million, assuming he can borrow at 2 percent.

And he benefits from a host of laws that let him borrow from the government at zero interest, charge monopoly prices and even turn taxes embedded in the monthly bills of his electric company customers into cash that never gets to government, juicing his fortune at your expense.

The truth is that Buffett’s wealth is much more than the value of his Berkshire Hathaway stock. And government policy helps make it grow and grow.

So think about that image — a top-of-the-line Gulfstream G650 jet and 160 million Americans, each with the same net worth. Now imagine a much smaller jet, with 12 or so oligarchs, and ask yourself just why you are paying taxes to enhance their fortunes instead of your nest egg.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/12/the-wealthiest-dozen-americans-own-more-than-the-bottom-half.html

The wealthiest dozen Americans own more than the bottom half
Shocking new report on wealth inequality actually understates the truth
December 2, 2015 2:00AM ET
by David Cay Johnston

A report out today provides a powerful image that will help people understand how extreme concentration of wealth has become in America — an issue at the core of our economic, political and social woes over the past 35 years.

“America’s 20 wealthiest people — a group that could fit comfortably in one single Gulfstream G650 luxury jet — now own more wealth than the bottom half” of Americans, according to the report, by Chuck Collins and Josh Hoxie, both veteran analysts of inequality in America.

But there’s a big problem with that memorable image: It seriously understates just how much wealth these 20 people have.

Probably just 12 or 15 of those at the top own as much as America’s worst-off 160 million people. That’s about $732 billion on each side of that equation. For the top 20, it averages $36 billion each; for the bottom half, $4,575 each.

Wealth and influence
The intense concentration of wealth matters because it makes the economy less efficient, discouraging investments that create jobs while giving a relative handful of superrich Americans vast sway over the agendas that politicians pursue.

Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, provided nearly half the contributions to the presidential candidates in both parties, though giving was heavily skewed to Republicans.

The result is policies that take from the many and redistribute to the already rich few through stealth techniques that rarely make the news but can be found in the public record. Among these policies are a failure to enforce the laws of business competition, severe restrictions on unions and subsidies galore for big companies.

Five years ago, the 400 households reporting the largest incomes on their tax returns captured an astonishing 6 percent of all the increased income in America, as I revealed a year ago. Such massive inequality reflects not market economics but political influence that tilts the economic playing field.

And because of their political influence, those at the very top get tax favors, especially the deferral of taxes into the distant future, which transforms the burden of taxes into a bonanza of increased profits.

If you wonder why Washington doesn’t seem to fix problems that affect most Americans, this is the answer: Politicians take care of the hands that feed them, the donor class.

In an era when so many voters are easily swayed with angry rhetoric, made-up facts and slick marketing of policies that sound great but actually hurt the vast majority, most politicians pay no price for catering to the richest of the rich at the expense of the many.

Secret wealth
Wealth at the top is much more concentrated than Collins and Hoxie report, because we have only weak and incomplete measures of wealth. And we let people choose how to value their wealth.

Is an asset worth what was paid for it (known as basis) or its value after depreciation or its fair market value today? A smart owner picks basis when dealing with tax appraisers but market value when seeking loans. We let people simultaneously pose as poorer to the taxman and wealthier to their bankers.

The Collins and Hoxie analysis of top wealth was based on the latest Forbes 400, a promotional vehicle for America’s leading wealth-porn magazine. I devour every issue — and not just to feast my eyes on its charticles.

But the Forbes list is based mostly on disclosures about publicly traded stock, largely ignoring investments in other stocks and bonds as well as many other side businesses owned by those at the top.

Over the years, I have interviewed more than a dozen people whose wealth should put them on the Forbes 400 list, on the basis of public records on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission and at county courthouses, where land title, divorce and other records are often filed. None of these people have ever been mentioned in Forbes, however, in any article.

The list would be different if Forbes had a way to get at more privately held companies, analyzed more real estate records or could get a peek at the brokerage accounts of the superwealthy (or in some cases the banks they own).

Buffett’s billions
Counted or not by Forbes, the billionaires gather up mountains of dividends, royalties, interest and capital gains each year, making their wealth snowball apart from the companies they are best known for leading.

Forbes 400 leaders such as Bill Gates (No. 1) and Larry Ellison (No. 3) have sold huge amounts of stock over the years and used it to buy other assets not counted in the Forbes listings.

Gates’ second fortune is owned through his Cascade Investments LLC, which has large stakes in a more than a dozen big companies, including a major military boat builder, the Four Seasons luxury hotel chain and Republic Industries, a trash-hauling company. Forbes counts Gates’ second fortune, but those of many others are not so obvious.

Consider Warren Buffett, perennial No. 2 on the Forbes list of richest Americans. Forbes’ latest list shows his wealth as the value of his stake in Berkshire Hathaway, the Omaha, Nebraska, holding company that pays him a $100,000 annual salary.

But when Buffett disclosed data from his 2010 income tax return, it showed $62.8 million of income. More than $40 million of it was long-term capital gains and dividends, yet Buffett sold no Berkshire Hathaway shares, and the company pays no dividends. That tells us he has a second large fortune apart from Berkshire Hathaway.

He deducted about $16 million in investment interest, suggesting leveraged assets of perhaps $800 million, assuming he can borrow at 2 percent.

And he benefits from a host of laws that let him borrow from the government at zero interest, charge monopoly prices and even turn taxes embedded in the monthly bills of his electric company customers into cash that never gets to government, juicing his fortune at your expense.

The truth is that Buffett’s wealth is much more than the value of his Berkshire Hathaway stock. And government policy helps make it grow and grow.

So think about that image — a top-of-the-line Gulfstream G650 jet and 160 million Americans, each with the same net worth. Now imagine a much smaller jet, with 12 or so oligarchs, and ask yourself just why you are paying taxes to enhance their fortunes instead of your nest egg.
Watch conservatives avoid this information like the plague
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
The only reason this shameful scam continues is because most of those 160 million have no idea how badly they're being used- and indeed support the very ones ripping them off the worst.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
The only reason this shameful scam continues is because most of those 160 million have no idea how badly they're being used- and indeed support the very ones ripping them off the worst.
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” -Ronald Wright
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” -Ronald Wright
THAT'S the quote that's been rattling around my head for the last week! Thank you! Of course this is a convenient fiction peddled by the wealthy in order to perpetuate their free ride.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
THAT'S the quote that's been rattling around my head for the last week! Thank you! Of course this is a convenient fiction peddled by the wealthy in order to perpetuate their free ride.
It's a really weird thing to see people blame the economic problems of the country on the poorest members of it while industry receives subsidy after subsidy, destroys the environment and effectively pays negative taxes.. It would seem defunding education was part of the plan all along. Demonizing academia was probably one of the most successful investments the GOP ever made.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
It's a really weird thing to see people blame the economic problems of the country on the poorest members of it while industry receives subsidy after subsidy, destroys the environment and effectively pays negative taxes.. It would seem defunding education was part of the plan all along. Demonizing academia was probably one of the most successful investments the GOP ever made.
The Funding Fathers knew how essential a well educated citizenry was to the success of their democratic experiment and provided for education for all.

Republicans have succeeded in watering it down in our generation to a shadow of its former stature, even to the extreme of seeing districts offer subsidized housing to people who promise to stay and teach there.

I fear it's chipping away at what it means to be America, that our fundamental ideals of equal opportunity have become lies of convenience to hide the truth of an increasingly remote aristocratic class and an increasingly desperate underclass.

The tide will turn sooner or later.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
French revolution style me thinks(hopes!) :mrgreen:

History shows us the eventual outcomes of these kinds of situations. You get pushed hard enough, eventually you push back, and it usually ain't very pretty..
Well perhaps that's where you and I differ. You see, I've seen revolution up close and I'd much rather resolve this by civilized means.
 
Top