There's not a thing wrong with being wealthy

But if a wealthy person achieved their wealth by screwing over the working person (i.e., cheap-labor capitalists, banking usurers, Wall St. paper-flippers of "financial instruments", etc.), then they are slime. And if a wealthy person uses their wealth to screw over the working person (i.e., donors to 'free market' think tanks, donors to Tom DeLay types, etc.), that also makes them slime.

I have no sympathy for them when their roof caves in.

Seems to me the wealthy don't need more PR.

Jesus. People here are acting as if the Ruling Class is under attack.

but I don't think the OP is one of them. At least not that I have noticed.

I'm starting to think we should take up a collection for Wall Street bankers.

:cry:


:hi:

Seriously, if they need to apologize, they will hire Indian tradesmen to do it for them. You all can save your breath.

:spray: It's so fucking true.

It's kinda funny, actually.
:D

Or do they play to free themselves from the tolerable suffering conditions the rich people have created for them?

Its not that hilarious really.

Thanks. :D

But its expected that someone aware of their condition would want to free themself

uh, poverty. :eyes:

that they can pay off their bills and quit their jobs.

I'm very well aware of the motivation to throw away money in hopes of becoming obscenely wealthy...I do it myself and I'm securely employed and financially fairly secure! :D

rich. I do think most people would love to throw away the boss/employee relationship if they could.

Just because said employers won the genetic lottery.

I confess I never heard of it.

Never heard that one?

American dream. Just work hard. Make sacrifices (like food, medical, clothing, housing) to save money. Invest. Take chances (accumulate debt). Its hard work. You gotta believe.

The American dream is a lie.

Actually, all around me people succeed at a very high rate. The problem is that I just don't live in America. :)

:evilgrin:

in off shore accounts?

if they weren't the ones doing the investing. And there have been rich heirs who've done much good with their money.

:)

When you compare percentage of income paid to Taxes of some one making $50,000 per year compared to the anual income of $500,000 per year

How does 50% of $500,000 work out to be less than 10% of $50,000?

For example, if you saw a child drowning in a lake, and you could easily swim and save him while improving your suntan in the process, BUT chose not to due to laziness, you can go fuck off. You are an accessory to the death as far as I am concerned.

The spread between most of us in the US and many countries in Africa and other places puts us in the wealthy category relative to them. Do we personally sell everything and rent out a room and eat PB&J to help them out?

But be assure, if I could guarantee my children would never starve and our security, I would have little need of the rest.

But, these benevolent rich people I despise, oh my, they can guarantee their existence and ability to thrive 100X over, and still, still, they will let the others drown. That is contemptible, without a doubt.

live and what law applies believe it or not.

Because by law, being rich is permissible. So whats the point of this thread in the first place?

:eyes:

Hell, they would carry their own, but as shareholders, they are simply used to providing the initial capital and extracting the perpetual profits. Eventually the water carriers will get their "fair" payments trickle down to them for being the good advocate slaves they are.

Because most of the threads I've read have OPs who make rationalizations for thieves like Robert Rubin and the rest of the DLC Squad ("but they support the Democratic party!"). My thread is more in defense of people who make their money honestly and fairly, and who do genuine good with it (not that there's anything wrong with supporting the Democratic party -- as long as it's not to support DLC-type policies). My model for the "good capitalist" is Milton Hershey.

What if a man buys coffee beans from a trader at a fair price and has his company roast, repackage brand and sell them at a profit? Just because he "honestly" made money capitalistically (though we wonder if his workers were paid proportionally to what they produced) doesn't mean his world impact is benign. The coffee trader could have definitely exploited workers in South America to provide the product. This capitalistic system's great success (in its current form) depends on exploitation in many ways, and to dabble in it, no matter how "honestly", really can have drastic impacts on all parts of the world.

What is dishonest is pretending that simply following the model of supply and demand, purchase/produce/sell, etc, is just an "honest"/"fair"/"good" way to make money (even in a corrupted system). And then further, you have to wonder where the money came to start the company (being that most rich people are born rich, marry into it, or commit a crime to become rich)....

You are almost proposing a situation, about the honest wealthy "good capitalist", that is just as rare as the abusive welfare queen the right rails against.

production to Mexico anyway. Not like they're fit to be the poster child for "responsible global capitalism" which is an oxymoron!

is in lala land.

Other than that, thank you.

I think it's pathetic that these threads pop up the fucking DAY AFTER Poverty Awareness Month ends. The rich, regardless of how nice they are, don't need any fucking cheerleaders.

Milton Hershey may have been a good guy; who cares? Transnational corporations today are bigger and more powerful than anything that existed turn of last century. These days, Hershey's is just as guilty of reaping rewards from neoliberal "free" trade policies as any huge corporation. They source their cacao beans from Cargill, who routinely exploit child labor in Africa. They also outsourced several plants to Mexico.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12754

I noticed that, too.

As far as multinationals and today's Hershey's Corp. -- you're preaching to the choir to me.

Capitalism is inherently abusive.

With out them, they may not be wealthy at all. But they forget don't they....

... but so far I've seen that the wealthy get perks in every conceivable area of life, while the rest get kicked around.

as those who do it like to think of themselves. It's no different than winning at sports through steroids. That isn't competition, it's cheating, and yes it's shameful. Any idiot can destroy, and any idiot can plunder someone weaker.

They think that makes them something great, but they're pond scum, regardless of income. As Chris Matthews said the other day, this is no meritocracy.

earn that wealth except choose parents who were better off than mine. Wealth today is passed down and the money is multiplied by the performance of the stock market. The stock market and most investors are no friend of working class people.

My friend recognizes the fact that the tax codes and most opportunities in the US are skewed to favor those who are privileged by class and race.

Not all people born into her kind of wealth are so aware of their privilege.

(tied with the UK actually)

Of course it is passed down. The "good capitalist" is something that is produced. It is born.

"True compassion is more than throwing a coin to a beggar. It demands of our humanity that if we live in a society that produces beggars, we are morally commanded to restructure that society." - MLK, Jr.

all money is made at the expense of something or somebody... we pretend its ok because we all have been duped to believe in the "American Dream". There are too many people on this earth to think that our laughable 'free market' capitalism can work...
As long as we have millions uninsured, homeless people, unemployed, hungry kids, abused kids, etc., there is something wrong...

Which is a moral crime in itself. Seriously, everything has to be plated in Gold. You gotta be fuckn kidding me. Brushed chrome is much classier.

Where do people get this idea that the folks with the Rolexes are rich? They're probably the ones who are up to their eyeballs in debt.

Most of you wouldn't recognize a millionaire if you walked right past him. They tend not to be big spenders.

There is nothing at all wrong with being wealthy. I'd like to be wealthy.

But how much is enough and how much is too much?

I'd like enough to not have to worry about bills, not to have to know that my wife is playing the shell game each month.

I'd like to go through each month not breathing a sigh of relief each day because the extinction-level-event didn't finally leave what amounts to our household finances a smoking crater.

I'd like to earn enough money to live comfortably and give away what was excess. Because you can't take it with you, and if you benefit from the common weal it deserves something back, so maybe other people won't have to suffer.

I'd like to earn money, not scheme it from others.

Sadly, it seems the only way to be comfortable in American society any more is to have lightning strike or figure out some way to dig it out of the backs of the proles (I use that in the 1984 sense as well as the Worker sense). You can't get prosperous by working any more. Nobody really respects you if you suit up and show up every day.

They only respect you if you're wealthy. They assume you deserved it, otherwise, you'd be poor, right?

And then we worship them.

I can see why everyone thinks this country is screwed up. It kind of is.

And it felt good. Haha. I had what they wanted. And they gave me their money.

I could never feel good having used someone who needed help. In fact I gain great satisfaction helping others. I recently paid rent for someone who needed it. He thought it was a loan. But it wasn't a loan. I am happy because he's happy about it.

I hurt when I see someone who doesn't have enough. I am not impressed by wealth. It is meaningless. In fact it's degrading. The homeless are strong. The wealthy are weak. As a rule.

My happiest days were when I had little.

I have no doubt that Obama knows and will convey these ideas. This country has fallen far. But we will regain those good values. No of money, but of caring.

Recently a man said to me "I would rather have a friend than a hundred dollar bill". That statement was more powerful to me than many I've heard before.

Thanks. :)

You're welcome.

:-)

If I swindle a parking lot out of GM, it doesn't give land back to Native Americans either.

Damn. I see what you are saying.

And by the way, I would give anything to see native Americans back in their rightful place. Anything. It's the life I am dying to see, and will never see. Nothing but insanity here in these car ridden cities.

So I believe that people can be good, or bad. And suddenly I am beginning to think that it's the way our society is organized that is making people behave like wild and aggressive animals that are willing to eat each other to get above. Because on one hand I can see myself as a wealthy snob who is above it all, and yet also someone who can be satisfied with acorns that fall from an oak tree, and be caring and understanding.

But we set up this hierarchy. And by doing so we distanced ourselves from each other. And we became adversaries.

Thanks for keeping me honest.

I myself am not a marxist, although I do hate most rich people.

But for one man to be rich, many workers would have to been screwed over by some means. To dabble in the game is not benign.

because it's probably very relative.


I think I read someplace that the poorest of Americans are still better off than many of the poor in other countries.


My own home is very modest...quite small by usual standards, I suppose.

I like to watch those house hunting shows on HGTV...especially when they're in Europe and such. Geez, what passes for "acceptable" housing over there is not even close to what I have myself, that I almost feel guilty for thinking my home is sort of crappy.

No doubt my house would be a palace for millions of people who don't even have homes.

So in a way, most of us in America are "wealthy".

and use the chicken-shits as fertilizer. Chicken shit is great fertilizer.

My grandparents on both sides are millionaires because of thrifty living and saving/investing a good portion of their income during their lives. One side was farmers who owned their land and the other sida was employed in union jobs, they just saved all there income and always lived very simply (both my grandmothers still wash paper plates and foil to use again for example). My dad and brother both make mid-six figure incomes running companies that work under government contracts, they both don't really lead that lavish of a lifestyle.

I only make 50k a year, did six years in the military and am using the trade I learned there to make a living now. I live with my grandmother and help her out with the housework plus she is scared staying alone in the house by herself. I squirrel away a good part of my income just because the things that interest me and hobbies I have don't cost much money. I'll hopefully be wealthy one day also, just for financial security, but I don't have dreams of oppressing people or screwing people over, nobody in my family does, we just want to live a decent life and not struggle. Is that so terrible?

selling crack & heroin to people that end up fucked or dead where are you then? Or drain the accounts of hard working people i.e. Charles Keating/Neil Bush...where are you?

Your essential statement is too raw, too flat, too void...it requires more nuance than that

These threads make me fucking nuts.

There is something wrong with the way wealth is unequally distributed in this country. Is that "the fault" of the winners? Doesn't matter. It still needs to be fixed and that's gonna feel like punishment to the people who have it all.

which is not earned, eg. profit.

The vast majority of millionaires (not the rare mega-millionaires, but the more numerous people worth 1 - 5 million) earned their money through more common incomes like small businesses or professional salaries such as medicine or law. And they also saved like crazy.

I refer to THE MILLIONAIRE NEXT DOOR below. My dad was one of those next-door millionaires. Lived all his life in an $18,000 tract house he bought right after the war. I don't remember him EVER flying anywhere, except maybe during WWII, when he served as an Army private. Drove his 50's Chevy straight into the ground. Worked two jobs, one of them as a restaurant cook. Saved like a demon, though, and just kept putting money away. I never knew what he was worth until he died.

No point in parsing, if they weren't appropriating the labor of workers they wouldn't be capitalist.

Most of these guys (modest millionaires admittedly) accumulated their wealth by being tight with a penny. They saved like demons, drive older model cars, live in the same houses they've owned for decades, and don't flaunt expensive watches or designer clothes. They're cheap, cheap, cheap.

In summary: Live beneath your means!"

From Amazon.com review:

"How can you join the ranks of America's wealthy (defined as people whose net worth is over one million dollars)? It's easy, say doctors Stanley and Danko, who have spent the last 20 years interviewing members of this elite club: you just have to follow seven simple rules. The first rule is, always live well below your means. The last rule is, choose your occupation wisely. You'll have to buy the book to find out the other five. It's only fair. The authors' conclusions are commonsensical. But, as they point out, their prescription often flies in the face of what we think wealthy people should do. There are no pop stars or athletes in this book, but plenty of wall-board manufacturers--particularly ones who take cheap, infrequent vacations! Stanley and Danko mercilessly show how wealth takes sacrifice, discipline, and hard work, qualities that are positively discouraged by our high-consumption society. "You aren't what you drive," admonish the authors. Somewhere, Benjamin Franklin is smiling."

Wealth does not ncessitate lack of compassion for those with less.

That's where me and the wealthy disagree.

Just as not everyone getting welfare is not a welfare queen, not everyone who is rich don't want to pay taxes. The main complaint is the escalating tax rate, which was designed to be an equalizer, but which results in I think a 36% tax rate for income over $150k or something like that. I think it was closer to 40% before Reagan.

Everyone wants to pay their fair share; it's just that many also feel that they are paying disproportionately more, leading some to try to shield their money in havens and loopholes, etc.

One problem is that as income increases, the assumption is that all that extra is disposable. I took a higher paying job last year, allowing me to afford life insurance and longterm disability insurance to protect my family in the event of a problem with me. My wife had quit her job as a professor to take care of our kids. So, I had to get health insurance for the first time, not through my employer. The cost of medical/dental/disability/life adds up to almost $3000/mo or $36,000/yr. I actually have less disposable income now than 2 years ago, but i have a better safety net.

I feel it is a duty to pay taxes, but the additional income I now have puts me in a higher tax bracket. I have used the extra income for insurance for my family, not to buy an extra home, a boat, clothes, or anything precocious, but it is painful to have the additional income taxed at 36%.

They work an average of 70 hours a week, compared to 41 hours per week for middle-class people.



"When people think of the “rich,” they might imagine billionaire plutocrats presiding over yacht fleets. Reality shows have made these folks appear remarkably prevalent. Lost in our obsession with the extremely rich, though, is another trend: over the past two decades, the ranks of the somewhat rich have also exploded. Indeed, the 8.4 million American households—some 7.6 percent of all U.S. households—with a net worth between $1 million and $10 million comprise one of the fastest growing demographics in the country.

“The rich are different from you and me,” F. Scott Fitzgerald once said. But according to The Middle-Class Millionaire (Doubleday, 240 pp., $23.95), by Russ Alan Prince and Lewis Schiff, these working-rich households are not so different from the rest of us, at least in their stated values. “Overwhelmingly, these millionaire households are headed by people raised in ordinary middle-class homes,” Prince and Schiff write. “Through their lifestyle choices and spending decisions, they wield influence in the overall economy in support of the same middle-class values and concerns they were raised with: security, health, self-betterment, family, and community.” Predominantly small business owners or principals in professional partnerships, these millionaires “have achieved the American dream the American way.”

Prince, a marketing consultant, and Schiff, a private wealth manager, surveyed 586 members of the burgeoning “Middle-Class Millionaire” demographic about their lifestyles and their aspirations. They also surveyed over 3,000 actual middle-class people (with annual incomes between $50,000 and $80,000) for comparison. The results were surprising. According to Prince and Schiff, today’s millionaires may actually behave more like quintessential middle-class Americans than the actual middle class does.

For instance, about 85 percent of both Middle-Class Millionaires and “middle-middle-class” people agreed that “providing your children with the best possible education” is important. The millionaires, however, were far more likely to consider the quality of an area’s public schools when shopping for houses. Nine in ten middle-middle-class and millionaire households agreed that “anyone can become a millionaire if he or she works hard enough.” But Middle-Class Millionaires said they worked an average of 70 hours per week, compared to only 41 hours per week for middle-middle-class people. The millionaires were also more persistent in the face of failure."

http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-03-08/meet-the-middle-class-millionaires

And this:

THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF WEALTH IN AMERICA
The number of U.S. millionaires (people with a net worth of over $1 million (excluding primary residence) rose 8 percent in 2005 to 8.9 million in 2006, according to TNS Financial Services, a global market-research firm headquartered in London. More U.S. millionaires (more than one-third, in fact) make their homes in California than in any other state, says TNS Financial Services.

What's more, millionaires rarely lead pampered lives of luxury. Research from the Claritas Corp., a San Diego-based market-research firm specializing in compiling demographic data for commercial use, indicates that in 97 percent of cases, they live on less than 10 percent of their wealth. In contrast, the flashy jet-setting elite accounts for just 5 percent of millionaires nationwide, according to the research of “sales psychologist” Kerry Johnson.

The average millionaire in this country is 57 years old and the average billionaire is 59, according to statistics from Chicago-based Northern Trust Corporation. Millionaires typically come from a middle-class or blue-collar background and likely graduated from a state university, Johnson says, citing statistics from the Claritas Corp and U.S. Trust in New York.

http://registeredrep.com/mag/finance_finding_hidden_millionaires_200708100523/

I suspect there are a hell of alot of people who would work 70+ hours a week if only they could get a job....

my late husband always commended wealthy people he knew for having the wisdom to choose the right parents...
(he was someone who was born poor, worked his way up as an architect in New York, became a very wealthy man and then lost it all in a lawsuit before I married him and he was acutely aware of how the system works)

there are many factors that contribute to a person's station in this life and no one should buy into the nonsense of the "American Dream" in real time. It is a wonderful theory and a great idea to continue to work on but NO ONE should continue to be deluded....

So are you saying that only your late husband worked his way up while all other wealthy people inherited it? This is very confusing.

My husband was aware that there were many factors that contribute to where people find themselves financially. It is not merely hard work or persistence or commitment. He was very fortunate and lived during a time when it was a bit easier to apprentice and work into a position without a college degree. His was one of the classic 'pull yourself up...' stories but he was always one of the first people to tell you that he was 'lucky' and he knew that for every one of him there were hundreds just as hardworking and smart and dedicated as him that didn't become wealthy.

There's so much in life that happens because of luck. The luck of being born into a family that values education (mine). The luck of meeting the right mate who'll be emotionally supportive. The luck of walking in on opportunity just as it presents itself.

But as they say, there's also the saying that good luck favors the prepared mind.

It's a combination of being lucky plus being willing to pursue that luck with hard work.