Opinion on billionaires.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 1:17pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Sounds too much like equality of outcome.

I went to AIT which, by any measure, is not a wonderful college. Got my diploma from there, came back later to finish my degree. Paid, for the most part, by the State, although there were some fees. Later as a mature student, I received welfare support to help me further study, again in AIT. I got my MBA in Oz, which I paid for myself, and a further Bachelor, again in OZ, which I paid for myself.

Education is mostly free in this country. Some people want the prestige of a "better" institution, and they pay for it.. but for the vast majority of people out there in Ireland, they can get a decent level of education without investing in it, as they do in other countries. Barring the requirements on the LC points (which wasn't much), anyone could have done the course I did originally.

Equal opportunities abound. There were a wide range of students in my course 22 years ago, from all walks of life, including two Travellers. So.. nah.. equal Opportunities do exist. It's just that some people want to go to Trinity, and so, there are extra conditions to be met.

I've known self-made millionaires, and most of them started at the bottom. The difference is that most people don't have the courage to commit themselves to an idea, and turn it into a profitable business. I've been involved in two startups both of which were reasonably successful, although there were hard times. I find that few people want to commit themselves to the dedicated lifestyle that's generally required to transform a startup into being a success.

Equal opportunity is there. The issue is choice. Most people simply choose not to live that way.... unless it's handed to them tied together with a nice silver bow.

only that data and research shows, it doesnt, and is possibly reducing as we speak, i have a similarish educational experience to yourself, we re the lucky ones, many are simply just not that lucky, this is far more complex than just poor choices

IAMAMORON · 28-08-2020 1:21pm

Strumms wrote: »

Free medical care is disappearing, slowly but surely. My parents in their late 70’s early 80’s both lost their medical cards last year or year before. Both are ex state employees, paid tax all their lives. My father has a long term heart issue as well as worsening arthritis. My mother has one or two complaints including arthritis herself which although manageable need medication and physiotherapy to keep on top of.. Both meds and physio are privately paid for by her.

I am not a doctor, I cannot help your folks, I wish them well. They lost their cards because they can afford to, it is that simple. Please choose a side and vote accordingly, you and your parents are very lucky to live in a democracy where you have options.

Strumms wrote: »

Yet, you can have people who land on our own shores to improve their own quality of life and economic wellbeing and get accommodation, cash, legal advice, medical treatment and a host of benefits having never contributed a red cent to the running and upkeep of the country...

You are massively off topic, if you want to have a foreigner crank go and start one somewhere else. I love foreigners and they need the most support. It is not all about greedy millionaires, even though we need them too.

28-08-2020 1:23pm

OK. So Ricky Rich owns a hotel worth 10 million. Employs 50 staff. After he pays them and all his overheads is left with 50k for himself, on which he pays taxes like everyone else. If he makes a profit, his company also pays tax on that separate from his 50k at 12.5%. Money he could use to hire more workers, or tide him over in leaner times, like now with COVID.

SF gets into power, decides to "tax the rich" and lands him with a tax bill of 5.5 million (55% of his wealth, like PAYE workers). He sells the hotel to pay the tax. 50 staff are on the dole.

Ironically they are totally opposed to the exact same taxes when talking about property tax or water charges.

This is the way the "tax the rich" brigade think.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 1:23pm

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I am not a doctor, I cannot help your folks, I wish them well. They lost their cards because they can afford to, it is that simple. Please choose a side and vote accordingly, you and your parents are very lucky to live in a democracy where you have options.

You are massively off topic, if you want to have a foreigner crank go and start one somewhere else. I love foreigners and they need the most support. It is not all about greedy millionaires, even though we need them too.

how do you know this?

what if 'both sides' are wrong?

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 1:25pm

Deleted User wrote: »

OK. So Ricky Rick owns a hotel worth 10 million. Employs 50 staff. After he pays them and all his overheads is left with 50k for himself, on which he pays taxes like everyone else. If he makes a profit, his company also pays tax on that separate from his 50k at 12.5%. Money he could use to hire more workers, or tide him over in leaner times, like now with COVID.

SF gets into power, decides to "tax the rich" and lands him with a tax bill of 5.5 million (55% of his wealth, like PAYE workers). He sells the hotel to pay the tax. 50 staff are on the dole.

This is the way the "tax the rich" brigade think.

its not how i think, if sf ever get into government, which i suspect may never occur, they ll more than likely have to cuddle up to one of the usuals, if that occurs, they wont have much power, i.e. dont worry about them, if you re not a fan

28-08-2020 1:25pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so the data and research proving that those born into wealthier families, have far better opportunities in life, and those that are born into relative poverty, do not, including in this country, must be wrong then! you re opportunities in life can regularly come down to your choice of parents and date of birth, just sometimes, so chose wisely!

Sure, they have better opportunities in life.. Money opens many doors. But that's not to say that someone else, who wasn't born in the situation, couldn't create an equally successful life for themselves. There are always going to be inequalities due to backgrounds, such as what your parents achieved and what they're prepared to provide you for your future.

but sometimes you cant, and sometimes some can struggle at the earlier stages in our educational system, and fail to meet the criteria to gain access to our third level systems, some of these individuals, are 'lucky' to gain employment at minimum wage!

My first degree year. I failed 7 out of 11 exams. Did the repeats, and passed 6. I failed 3 of the exams I passed the first time around. So I changed my major and college, since Computer Science obviously wasn't for me. Moved to Finance, and every single year I failed my accounting exams. Did well in the other exams, but accounting? Meh. Finally passed them after I left college for a while, and worked. I left college and joined the workforce with a diploma, not a degree. Got a crappy first job. Got a worse second job. Got a really good managerial job after that, and then, got into a startup as a manager.

We evolve. We learn. We recognize that we have problems, and that we must work around them. Or we give up. I've known a lot of people who simply gave up, accepting the life that they were presented with. Bugger that. Since then, I've worked in all manner of professions, and obtained much better qualifications... because I didn't give up.

You seem to want everyone to have equal opportunities, even though, many people simply choose not to push themselves. And yes, I know people who failed their LC, worked crappy jobs, went back to pass their LC, and went on to find much better opportunities later.

IAMAMORON · 28-08-2020 1:26pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

how do you know this?

what if 'both sides' are wrong?

What?

seamus · 28-08-2020 1:29pm

Deleted User wrote: »

OK. So Ricky Rich owns a hotel worth 10 million. Employs 50 staff. After he pays them and all his overheads is left with 50k for himself, on which he pays taxes like everyone else. If he makes a profit, his company also pays tax on that separate from his 50k at 12.5%. Money he could use to hire more workers, or tide him over in leaner times, like now with COVID.

SF gets into power, decides to "tax the rich" and lands him with a tax bill of 5.5 million (55% of his wealth, like PAYE workers). He sells the hotel to pay the tax. 50 staff are on the dole.

If Ricky Rich's hotel only comes out with 50k before tax, then it's not worth €10m.

We can all invent whatever scenarios we want to make our point. Doesn't make us right.

28-08-2020 1:29pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

no we dont, a friend of mine just spent 50k getting one of his kids through 3rd level, and thats just 3rd level, god knows how much he spent through previous levels, then of course theres all the taxes he, his wife and kids have paid!

As did I, because I make a decent living. Actually I spent a lot less, as my kid was taught that money doesn't grow on trees and helped pay for college herself by working low paid part time jobs.

Some of my kids friends got free fees and all sorts of grants to go to college - as I did myself back in the day - because their parents are poor. This is the land of opportunity.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

yes, we generally have better opportunities than developing countries, but we still dont all have equal opportunities amongst ourselves in this country

We have a great and fair system here. If anyone gets screwed it's the middle and higher income people. In the UK and US those children of unemployed or poor families would be expected to take out large student loans.

28-08-2020 1:30pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

only that data and research shows, it doesnt, and is possibly reducing as we speak, i have a similarish educational experience to yourself, we re the lucky ones, many are simply just not that lucky, this is far more complex than just poor choices

They have equal opportunities to study... Access to secondary and third level education which is not restricted due to economic or social backgrounds.

Choice plays a major role in what happens to people. Personal responsibility for our choices... That is important. Which is why inequalities exist. People make the wrong choices, or they simply choose not to compete.

Can you provide me with links to this research? I'll take a look.

Motivator · 28-08-2020 1:30pm

mick087 wrote: »

It be good if they was to share this fortune with the people who make them there fortune there staff.

They do share it with them. It’s called “Wages”.

IAMAMORON · 28-08-2020 1:33pm

Deleted User wrote: »

OK. So Ricky Rich owns a hotel worth 10 million. Employs 50 staff. After he pays them and all his overheads is left with 50k for himself, on which he pays taxes like everyone else. If he makes a profit, his company also pays tax on that separate from his 50k at 12.5%. Money he could use to hire more workers, or tide him over in leaner times, like now with COVID.

SF gets into power, decides to "tax the rich" and lands him with a tax bill of 5.5 million (55% of his wealth, like PAYE workers). He sells the hotel to pay the tax. 50 staff are on the dole.

Ironically they are totally opposed to the exact same taxes when talking about property tax or water charges.

This is the way the "tax the rich" brigade think.

You didn't include accelerated capital allowances , 0/10.

28-08-2020 1:35pm

seamus wrote: »

If Ricky Rich's hotel only comes out with 50k before tax, then it's not worth €10m.

We can all invent whatever scenarios we want to make our point. Doesn't make us right.

It's worth €10m to someone. Maybe Ricky Rich is a crap owner? Maybe he hasn't the cashflow to modernise to attract the right clientele? Etc etc

28-08-2020 1:36pm

IAMAMORON wrote: »

You didn't include accelerated capital allowances , 0/10.

This is assuming that this fictitious new government change the laws to exclude such "loopholes"

Ash.J.Williams · 28-08-2020 1:38pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

staff are a critical component of the wealth created, without them, little or no wealth is created

not in this thread, they are literally nothing.

Ush1 · 28-08-2020 1:38pm

Greyfox wrote: »

Sounds like you havent actually been reading the posts on here. The fact is most billionaires do more bad for humanity than good. Yes they employ a lot of taxpayers but they also put other companies with taxpayers out of business

I would highly dispute that "fact". How could that even be a fact? Who defines what's good for humanity?

I've read through the posts thanks. So you aren't supposed to grow a business if you are muscling in on a competitors patch? Business isn't like that unfortunately, like nature, it's red in tooth and claw.

IAMAMORON · 28-08-2020 1:41pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This is assuming that this fictitious new government change the laws to exclude such "loopholes"

Maybe, but they cannot backtrack on available tax legislation, I wouldn't go there hypothetically either. Keep it as real as possible.

If we are unlucky enough to let the lefties into power I have no doubt they will make a shambles of everything. They always do.

28-08-2020 1:43pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

not in this thread, they are literally nothing.

There is nothing stopping employees leaving and starting their own business and earning millions and billions. I did it, the first part at least. Still waiting for the millions and billions.

28-08-2020 1:45pm

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Maybe, but they cannot backtrack on available tax legislation, I wouldn't go there hypothetically either. Keep it as real as possible.

In a "socialist utopia" military dictatorship anything is possible. Look at Venezuela.

28-08-2020 1:46pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

its interesting that somebody such as warren would say that his secretary pays more tax than him, is kinna stupid!!

Please stop, Warren Buffett’s secretary does not pay more tax him. 10,000 secretaries probably dont pay as much tax as he does. Also who cares what he says, likely just lip service.

As seen as you like to claim people who don’t work pay tax we should be including all the mountains of tax warren buffet pays on consumption taxes also which would of course significantly increase his tax bill.

One of the biggest cons ever in this country in increasing tax rates as you earn more, massively unfair, massively stupid.

IAMAMORON · 28-08-2020 1:53pm

Deleted User wrote: »

In a "socialist utopia" military dictatorship anything is possible. Look at Venezuela.

I wouldn't panic. The lefties would not know where to start.

If they ever get in there will be some showboating for the masses, look out for shoulder barging the banks ( why not ) and hefty tax charges on the super rich. The clowns will think this is a good idea, they already do in fact.

In reality as soon as they hit 35% in the polls most of the really smart money will be out of here. There lies the biggest irony, all these big shots they plan on taxing will be gonzo.

28-08-2020 1:54pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

not in this thread, they are literally nothing.

It depends on what kind of employees we're talking about. We live, for the most part, in a skill based economy. Better skills and you have greater opportunities for employment, and in turn, salary. Those with the experience and better skills make the most money... but they're still employees, which means there's always going to be a cap on what they make.

Those who leave employment to start their own businesses, have no such cap, except based on the success of their venture.

Employees are important for the operation of any business, except where the skills of the employees are so low, that they're easily replaced. People, in the western world, have the choice to obtain better skills (whether through third level, or by themselves over the internet). That many people don't choose to improve their skills, and remain on the bottom, is on them. It's not on their employers.

4068ac1elhodqr · 28-08-2020 2:05pm

Javon Young Harvester wrote: »

Please stop, Warren Buffett’s secretary does not pay more tax him. 10,000 secretaries probably dont pay as much tax as he does. .

This relates to: 'As a percentage of their income'. That fact is not lip service.

It's all about 'fair share', and his secretary is contributing more of her share of wages, than he does, from his (as a percent).
https://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secretary-taxes/index.html
"But the differential between me and the rest of the office, not just my secretary but the rest of the office, was greater than that. It'll be closer, but I'll probably be the lowest paying taxpayer in the office."

Buffett has been advocating for a minimum tax on top wage earners -- those like himself who benefit from the fact that capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than regular earnings.
Gates also said recently he wished he paid more income taxes, hindsight however is convinient.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 2:06pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Sure, they have better opportunities in life.. Money opens many doors. But that's not to say that someone else, who wasn't born in the situation, couldn't create an equally successful life for themselves. There are always going to be inequalities due to backgrounds, such as what your parents achieved and what they're prepared to provide you for your future.

My first degree year. I failed 7 out of 11 exams. Did the repeats, and passed 6. I failed 3 of the exams I passed the first time around. So I changed my major and college, since Computer Science obviously wasn't for me. Moved to Finance, and every single year I failed my accounting exams. Did well in the other exams, but accounting? Meh. Finally passed them after I left college for a while, and worked. I left college and joined the workforce with a diploma, not a degree. Got a crappy first job. Got a worse second job. Got a really good managerial job after that, and then, got into a startup as a manager.

We evolve. We learn. We recognize that we have problems, and that we must work around them. Or we give up. I've known a lot of people who simply gave up, accepting the life that they were presented with. Bugger that. Since then, I've worked in all manner of professions, and obtained much better qualifications... because I didn't give up.

You seem to want everyone to have equal opportunities, even though, many people simply choose not to push themselves. And yes, I know people who failed their LC, worked crappy jobs, went back to pass their LC, and went on to find much better opportunities later.

what if money isnt the only problem, what if the educational system has failed to meet your needs at the earlier stages, the rote system has major pitfalls for some!

we dont all have equal abilities in life, this must somehow be addressed, this is currently done very badly, hence outcomes such as long term unemployment, some criminal behaviors etc etc etc

absolute equality probably isnt possible, it could in fact be dangerous for all to achieve, but too much is simply that, too much, we potentially could be at that point now, its best we try resolve some of these inequalities, and reduce them, if possible, before we start doing really dump stuff!

IAMAMORON wrote: »

What?

how do you know their parents can afford their medical care?

Deleted User wrote: »

As did I, because I make a decent living. Actually I spent a lot less, as my kid was taught that money doesn't grow on trees and helped pay for college herself by working low paid part time jobs.

Some of my kids friends got free fees and all sorts of grants to go to college - as I did myself back in the day - because their parents are poor. This is the land of opportunity.

We have a great and fair system here. If anyone gets screwed it's the middle and higher income people. In the UK and US those children of unemployed or poor families would be expected to take out large student loans.

funnily enough, money kinna does grow on trees, within our financial institutions, of which the more plutocratic elements in society have easier access to.

you re truly believing in the utopic 'american dream' nonsense, again we dont live in a world of equal opportunities

many middle class citizens are forced to take on student debt, in order to get a decent education, ive met many successful people that have had to, and were still paying it back in their 50's, even though they were highly successful, very evident in america, its not just the lower classes!

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I wouldn't panic. The lefties would not know where to start.

If they ever get in there will be some showboating for the masses, look out for shoulder barging the banks ( why not ) and hefty tax charges on the super rich. The clowns will think this is a good idea, they already do in fact.

In reality as soon as they hit 35% in the polls most of the really smart money will be out of here. There lies the biggest irony, all these big shots they plan on taxing will be gonzo.

relax,the left isnt going anywhere, they dont have much of a chance of getting into power, and the conservatives are doing a fine job of fcuking things up anyway

Deleted User wrote: »

It depends on what kind of employees we're talking about. We live, for the most part, in a skill based economy. Better skills and you have greater opportunities for employment, and in turn, salary. Those with the experience and better skills make the most money... but they're still employees, which means there's always going to be a cap on what they make.

Those who leave employment to start their own businesses, have no such cap, except based on the success of their venture.

Employees are important for the operation of any business, except where the skills of the employees are so low, that they're easily replaced. People, in the western world, have the choice to obtain better skills (whether through third level, or by themselves over the internet). That many people don't choose to improve their skills, and remain on the bottom, is on them. It's not on their employers.

but what if you simply cant get access to further training, even if theres no financial barriers?

Geuze · 28-08-2020 2:09pm

Brittany Large Bartender wrote: »

Well you'd have to start at closing loopholes, schemes, immoral fiscal tools and 'creative' accounting*, before even a tiny 0.5% wealth tax type increase. It would also have to be a unified effort across the EU and/or OECD(x37 that own 80% of global wealth).

*Remember the Panama Papers fiasco?

e.g. (Saint) Bono used a company (minority investor) in the Channel Islands, which then used low-tax Malta, to then invest in a shopping centre in Eastern Europe, using a Holding Company. Then broke Lithuanian laws using excessive paper losses (revaluation) to avoid paying any tax at all. on the centres profits.

The (aggressive) tax avoidance scheme was considered somewhat legal, but scrapped soon after after public exposure and abuse by the wealthy, particularly the celeb rolemodels of success.

Worth repeating:
- The world’s 2,153 billionaires have more wealth than the 4,600,000,000 people who make up 60% of the planet’s population.

- Getting the richest 1% to pay just 0.5 percent extra tax on their wealth over the next 10 years would equal the investment needed to create 117 million jobs in sectors such as elderly and childcare, education and health.

I agree 100% on abolishing reliefs/loopholes, etc.

On the issue of a wealth tax, note that several countries have scrapped wwealth taxes, due to practical issues.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 2:10pm

Geuze wrote: »

I agree 100% on abolishing reliefs/loopholes, etc.

On the issue of a wealth tax, note that several countries have scrapped wwealth taxes, due to practical issues.

its a very complicated one, its hard to know how we tackle it, without causing bigger problems

Greyfox · 28-08-2020 2:15pm

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Elaborate on these "facts" please.

Billionaires are more bad that good because: They create monopolies which mean less competition which is bad for customers. In America they have the power to influence politics which is bad for democracy.

When a billionaire opens a superstore usually the amount of people employed is less than the people employed by the small stores that may go out of business. Amazon is amazing but it's success put a lot of book stores out of business. Also private jets and yachts are bad for the environment.

EndaHonesty · 28-08-2020 2:17pm

Ubbquittious wrote: »

They might be worth 100bn but they don't have 100bn to their disposal. The cost of 1 share in their company at the present time multiplied by how many of them they own is how they come up with these figures.

If Bezos started selling shares like mad people would get suspicious fast and the share price would plummet as a result

Jeff Bezos has sold $7.2 billion worth of shares so far in 2020...

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 2:20pm

Greyfox wrote: »

Billionaires are more bad that good because: They create monopolies which mean less competition which is bad for customers. In America they have the power to influence politics which is bad for democracy.

When a billionaire opens a superstore usually the amount of people employed is less than the people employed by the small stores that may go out of business. Amazon is amazing but it's success put a lot of book stores out of business. Also private jets and yachts are bad for the environment.

noting, the sme sector is the largest employer of our own state!

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Jeff Bezos has sold $7.2 billion worth of shares so far in 2020...

after how much was 'invested' in share buy backs!

apologies, i know somebody asked for a link to data and research, i cannot provide it, but many economic commentators talk about it, including irish ones, i know ul economist Stephen Kinsella has done some digging in relation to rising inequality resulting in rising inequalities of opportunities, so his work might be worth checking out for such information:

http://www.stephenkinsella.net/

https://twitter.com/stephenkinsella?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

28-08-2020 2:21pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

what if money isnt the only problem, what if the educational system has failed to meet your needs at the earlier stages, the rote system has major pitfalls for some!

Which it did. It failed me multiple times throughout my teens and early adulthood. However, it is a system that aims to mass produce education. It wasn't about being unfair or unequal. It was simply that some people fall through the cracks because their type of intelligence wasn't the same as the majority, who did manage quite well within that system.

But things are different now, with all the access to the internet, globalisation of ideas, and the sharing of educational practices. There's more scope to educate the individual than ever before, and it is happening. Slowly, but it's getting there. In time, Technology will create the environment for such learning to occur.

we dont all have equal abilities in life, this must somehow be addressed, this is currently done very badly, hence outcomes such as long term unemployment, some criminal behaviors etc etc etc

We will never have equal "abilities" in life. Individually, we are different. Which is something to be admired. In any case, we have the same opportunities towards education up to a point. We can all gain the "basic" (not minimum) level of education needed to start us off... and then, we can come back for more, if we are that way inclined.

absolute equality probably isnt possible, it could in fact be dangerous for all to achieve, but too much is simply that, too much, we potentially could be at that point now, its best we try resolve some of these inequalities, and reduce them, if possible, before we start doing really dump stuff!

Equality of outcome is dumb. Active competition between individuals is healthy, and it forces people to evolve to be better suited to the challenges that life presents us with. Some people fail and simply give up, but that should never mean we prevent competition from being a primary driver in society (which we see happening with gender/diversity quotas).

As for these inequalities, I'm still trying to figure out what they are and why they're so important.... My early adult years were anything but successful, but I've had plenty of opportunities towards becoming very successful in my life. Some, I've availed of, others I missed, and some I dismissed as something I didn't want. The opportunities were still there. I could be relatively rich now, if I'd stayed as a professional manager, but I didn't want the life that came with it. My colleagues did, and went on to become quite successful. Choice.

28-08-2020 2:28pm

Greyfox wrote: »

Billionaires are more bad that good because: They create monopolies which mean less competition which is bad for customers. In America they have the power to influence politics which is bad for democracy.

Billionaires don't create monopolies. Where are you getting this from?

And American politics can be influenced by anyone with money, doesn't need to be a billionaire. A millionaire can do so quite well. Hell, form a lobby with others who aren't millionaires, and you can influence politics.

When a billionaire opens a superstore usually the amount of people employed is less than the people employed by the small stores that may go out of business.

Any links/evidence for this claim?

28-08-2020 2:31pm

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Jeff Bezos has sold $7.2 billion worth of shares so far in 2020...

Perhaps due to his divorce?

completedit · 28-08-2020 2:35pm

Let them at it. I don't fawn over them like some do or hate them. Inequality in and of itself is not a problem. Think about it. Imagine we are living in a commune and everyone is roughly equal but it's equally ****. The modern world isn't perfect but we have such luxury and comfort compared to our ancestors and we should face the reality. Not everyone is but it's only the miracle of free market capitalism that means we are not lying in our own **** half dead at 43 with rotten teeth.

Don't know how to combat the monopoly power and the longer term implications of their companies, especially in Bezos case.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 2:41pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Which it did. It failed me multiple times throughout my teens and early adulthood. However, it is a system that aims to mass produce education. It wasn't about being unfair or unequal. It was simply that some people fall through the cracks because their type of intelligence wasn't the same as the majority, who did manage quite well within that system.

But things are different now, with all the access to the internet, globalisation of ideas, and the sharing of educational practices. There's more scope to educate the individual than ever before, and it is happening. Slowly, but it's getting there. In time, Technology will create the environment for such learning to occur.

We will never have equal "abilities" in life. Individually, we are different. Which is something to be admired. In any case, we have the same opportunities towards education up to a point. We can all gain the "basic" (not minimum) level of education needed to start us off... and then, we can come back for more, if we are that way inclined.

Equality of outcome is dumb. Active competition between individuals is healthy, and it forces people to evolve to be better suited to the challenges that life presents us with. Some people fail and simply give up, but that should never mean we prevent competition from being a primary driver in society (which we see happening with gender/diversity quotas).

As for these inequalities, I'm still trying to figure out what they are and why they're so important.... My early adult years were anything but successful, but I've had plenty of opportunities towards becoming very successful in my life. Some, I've availed of, others I missed, and some I dismissed as something I didn't want. The opportunities were still there. I could be relatively rich now, if I'd stayed as a professional manager, but I didn't want the life that came with it. My colleagues did, and went on to become quite successful. Choice.

but we have a tendency to simply ignore those that fall through the cracks, we re still doing this! even though some things are improving in this domain, theres still major failings. ive watched this all my life, im from a problematic neighborhood, its still highly problematic, covid has exasperated these issues, i hear domestic abuse all the time, and its getting worse. rote learning only truly works for a particular type of mind, if you dont have that type of mind, you could find yourself in serious trouble very quickly, and the system may not respond to your needs, ever! things are of course different now, but the cracks are still there!

our educational system has failed me also, as i spent most of my time in it having undiagnosed dyslexia and autism, theres something wrong there, as its obvious enough with me.

but what if technology doesnt fill in these cracks, what if its our approach and thinking regarding education and training?

Deleted User wrote: »

Billionaires don't create monopolies. Where are you getting this from?

And American politics can be influenced by anyone with money, doesn't need to be a billionaire. A millionaire can do so quite well. Hell, form a lobby with others who aren't millionaires, and you can influence politics.

Any links/evidence for this claim?

amazon is a perfect exam of a monopoly! how can you compete against a company that makes little or nothing from one of its main sectors?

completedit wrote: »

Let them at it. I don't fawn over them like some do or hate them. Inequality in and of itself is not a problem. Think about it. Imagine we are living in a commune and everyone is roughly equal but it's equally ****. The modern world isn't perfect but we have such luxury and comfort compared to our ancestors and we should face the reality. Not everyone is but it's only the miracle of free market capitalism that means we are not lying in our own **** half dead at 43 with rotten teeth.

Don't know how to combat the monopoly power and the longer term implications of their companies, especially in Bezos case.

free market capitalism is potentially one of the most dangerous forms of capitalism we ve ever created, and its relatively new, in the life time of capitalism itself, theres nothing stopping us from creating a new form of capitalism!

The Tetrarch · 28-08-2020 2:50pm

Everything should be free, man.

28-08-2020 2:52pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

but we have a tendency to simply ignore those that fall through the cracks, we re still doing this! even though some things are improving in this domain, theres still major failings. ive watched this all my life, im from a problematic neighborhood, its still highly problematic, covid has exasperated these issues, i hear domestic abuse all the time, and its getting worse. rote learning only truly works for a particular type of mind, if you dont have that type of mind, you could find yourself in serious trouble very quickly, and the system may not respond to your needs, ever! things are of course different now, but the cracks are still there!

our educational system has failed me also, as i spent most of my time in it having undiagnosed dyslexia and autism, theres something wrong there, as its obvious enough with me.

Sorry, but the Star trek reality is a fantasy. Humans are flawed and the systems they create are flawed. We are not going to have any kind of Utopian society with unlimited resources, and perfect equality any time soon.

As such, there will be inequalities due to shortages of resources, greed, corruption, inefficient systems, etc.

but what if technology doesnt fill in these cracks, what if its our approach and thinking regarding education and training?

Trust me, there are heaps upon heaps of people talking educational development to death. I've been to the seminars/conferences. You wouldn't believe some of the ideas coming out about how education should change... Not that it shouldn't change.. That it will change is a given. Through technology, but also through the endless debates (admittedly many are one sided) that go on.

amazon is a perfect exam of a monopoly! how can you compete against a company that makes little or nothing from one of its main sectors?

Except that it's not a monopoly. It doesn't control the market. It doesn't have the capability to prevent others from entering or establishing market share. They were simply the first, and with time, their market share will diminish, as others come along with better innovative ideas.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 2:55pm

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Everything should be free, man.

completely disagree there, all citizens should play a part in society, whether it be in a volunteering basis, but plutocratic elements should also not be given things for free, including bailouts, and the ability to create endless amounts of wealth and money!

4068ac1elhodqr · 28-08-2020 3:02pm

completedit wrote: »

Let them at it. I don't fawn over them like some do or hate them. Inequality in and of itself is not a problem. Think about it. Imagine we are living in a commune and everyone is roughly equal but it's equally ****. The modern world isn't perfect but we have such luxury and comfort compared to our ancestors and we should face the reality. Not everyone is but it's only the miracle of free market capitalism that means we are not lying in our own **** half dead at 43 with rotten teeth.

You could argue that half the country (or Western countries) are currently obese (doubling any covid type fatality rates), thanks to sugary fast foods.

They've also been shoved sugary cola drink ads for decades (thanks to free market capatialism), hence the rotten teeth fulfilment part. (profit and 'coolness' over health or wellbeing).

Cancer rates are also on the up (but hey glossy Marlbro Man ads were also very cool).
The US actually had life expectancy decline over more recent years, thanks to big Pharma free-market profit-seeking, which resulted in pushing opiates (the type that knocked off Prince in a lift) wherever possible.

Then when pharma pulled these (due to lawsuits), people such as the 100,000 in Chicago hooked on such meds, seeked cheaper (street, brown) alternatives to their arthritis or half-dead health dysfunctions, leading to societal run down. But hey, free market economy.

IAMAMORON · 28-08-2020 3:11pm

Brittany Large Bartender wrote: »

You could argue that half the country (or Western countries) are currently obese (doubling any covid type fatality rates), thanks to sugary fast foods.

They've also been shoved sugary cola drink ads for decades (thanks to free market capatialism), hence the rotten teeth fulfilment part. (profit and 'coolness' over health or wellbeing).

Cancer rates are also on the up (but hey glossy Marlbro Man ads were also very cool).
The US actually had life expectancy decline over more recent years, thanks to big Pharma free-market profit-seeking, which resulted in pushing opiates (the type that knocked off Prince in a lift) wherever possible.

Then when pharma pulled these (due to lawsuits), people such as the 100,000 in Chicago hooked on such meds, seeked cheaper (street, brown) alternatives to their arthritis or half-dead health dysfunctions, leading to societal run down. But hey, free market economy.

It has already been proven that cigarettes sales have increased despite the health lobby on advertising. Cancer rates are down. Go figure.

Strumms · 28-08-2020 3:36pm

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I am not a doctor, I cannot help your folks, I wish them well. They lost their cards because they can afford to, it is that simple. Please choose a side and vote accordingly, you and your parents are very lucky to live in a democracy where you have options.

You are massively off topic, if you want to have a foreigner crank go and start one somewhere else. I love foreigners and they need the most support. It is not all about greedy millionaires, even though we need them too.

They lost their cards because the pot of money that they participated even in a small minute way to help create all their lives isn’t thought of as being suitable to give a little back to and for them... so I’m on a fairness crank. Because of this situation, and because of physical rehabilitative hospital treatment I was denied after paying my share of tax for 23 or so years too..

But arrive, need it ? You got it !

In addition, I’m not having a foreigner crank, I’m in a relationship with a foreigner, a working and tax paying one.

Ubbquittious · 28-08-2020 7:09pm

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Jeff Bezos has sold $7.2 billion worth of shares so far in 2020...

Fook.

You'd buy a lot of outboard engines for that

Cyrus · 28-08-2020 7:13pm

Strumms wrote: »

They lost their cards because the pot of money that they participated even in a small minute way to help create all their lives isn’t thought of as being suitable to give a little back to and for them... so I’m on a fairness crank. Because of this situation, and because of physical rehabilitative hospital treatment I was denied after paying my share of tax for 23 or so years too..

But arrive, need it ? You got it !

In addition, I’m not having a foreigner crank, I’m in a relationship with a foreigner, a working and tax paying one.

I can’t quite make it out but I presume they failed the means test because their pension was too high?

growleaves · 28-08-2020 7:25pm

Stan27 wrote: »

Musk worth 100B
Bezos worth 200B.

Fair play to them, but prob should pay more taxes.
Global Inequality is a big problem.

What are your opinions?

I think its mad that people trust their opinion on anything, or speak about them with affection, or think its a conspiracy theory that they're obviously up to no good.

Amazon's practices are horrible. I don't buy from them.

28-08-2020 7:35pm

Parasitic scumbags.

Their bootlicking worshippers are even bigger scumbags.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 7:36pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Parasitic scumbags.

Their bootlicking worshippers are even bigger scumbags.

thats a bit strong now, they do innovate and create employment, along with other social benefits

28-08-2020 7:42pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

thats a bit strong now, they do innovate and create employment, along with other social benefits

They routinely get funding from the taxpayer.

They get taxpayer money to increase their bank balance. Any employer that forces workers to piss into bottles to maximum profit is a scrote.

I think parasitic is a reasonable word to use.

Galwayguy35 · 28-08-2020 7:43pm

mick087 wrote: »

All staff are key staff.

Without the warehouse staff who would work in the warehouse.
The majority of the workers are easily and quickly replaceable because some employers are allowed to get away with this.

I work in a warehouse myself, we keep the goods moving in and out but its the owner and his general manager not us who goes out and looks for new business to ensure we will have work to keep us going.

Of course floor staff would like more money for the job but the reality is there is always someone else to do the job.

28-08-2020 7:49pm

Deleted User wrote: »

They routinely get funding from the taxpayer.

Who does? Most Billionaires, or multi-billion companies are capable of sustaining themselves without any need for help from the taxpayer. Unless we're back to talking about the banking crash? In which case, you'd still need to be more specific.

They get taxpayer money to increase their bank balance. Any employer that forces workers to piss into bottles to maximum profit is a scrote.

I think parasitic is a reasonable word to use.

Too vague. Give some specific examples, and show us how they all do similar. Since you are generalising in a major way here.

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 7:51pm

Deleted User wrote: »

They routinely get funding from the taxpayer.

They get taxpayer money to increase their bank balance. Any employer that forces workers to piss into bottles to maximum profit is a scrote.

I think parasitic is a reasonable word to use.

they do indeed, but they always have, its sometimes critical to their existence, and we currently need many of them to remain in existence, for our overall survival.

the design of these operations causes parasitic like behavior, it allows behaviors such as 'Gresham's dynamic' to take place

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I work in a warehouse myself, we keep the goods moving in and out but its the owner and his general manager not us who goes out and looks for new business to ensure we will have work to keep us going.

Of course floor staff would like more money for the job but the reality is there is always someone else to do the job.

the activities of both the general operators and management are critical to the existence of the business, but this is rarely recognized and acknowledged, particularly in terms of the general operatives

Wanderer78 · 28-08-2020 7:53pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Who does? Most Billionaires, or multi-billion companies are capable of sustaining themselves without any need for help from the taxpayer. Unless we're back to talking about the banking crash? In which case, you'd still need to be more specific.

Too vague. Give some specific examples, and show us how they all do similar. Since you are generalising in a major way here.

large corporations, not just financial institutions, are regularly bailed out, this has existed for a very long time now, and is currently happening again now, tesla has received large amounts of public funding

Opinion on billionaires.

Comments