Just watched Nancy Pelosi on TV, talking about 'Republicans putting the wealth of America in the hands of a few.'
She reminds me of African dictators talking about a 'redistribution of wealth.'
Wealth, in a functioning Capitalist society, which America is supposed to be, is not a finite thing, with portions handed out to individuals until there's nothing left.
Wealth is infinite, and perpetuates itself through hard work, ingenuity, perseverance - and let's face it - luck.
If this was not so, there would be no rags to riches stories, which are fairly commonplace in America.
2006-10-08 19:33:36 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Inzaratha - one of only two logical, reasoned answers. We read the same books.
2006-10-08 19:44:06 · update #1
voltaire - I'm a Naturalized American, trust me, there are no struggling workers in America.
2006-10-08 20:23:51 · update #2
mark r - and RESOURCES are perpetuated through hard work, ingenuity and perseverance.
The Sun? Nothing to worry about. At least not in the forseeable future.
2006-10-08 20:37:24 · update #3
I agree with you.
I think it is because they still believe in Zero Sum ecomics which with the advent of computers, tech and the internet does NOT exist anymore. You can make wealth out of just an idea now, so resources are NOT finite.
The democrats have not caught on to this idea yet, and they are basically socialists. Socialism has never worked. They also believe in altruism which does not exist. People help others because it makes them feel good and forcing them to does not accomplish this.
2006-10-08 19:40:02 · answer #1 · answered by inzaratha 6 · 3⤊ 8⤋
You make some dire mistakes in your assertions, dear writer. Nothing is "infinite", except perhaps your imagination. When a politician talks about "wealth in the hands of a few," she references not that the economy is in stasis, but that the existing political system insufficiently rewards its struggling workers (millions of whom still make very nearly $5.25 per hour, which is, very, very hard to imagine).
There are many "rags to riches" stories. And indeed they are such wonderful stories, aren't they! The way it is written, some might misconstrue your commentary however, and conclude that you do not really support allowing these stories to accrue. Yes, there are a lot of millionaires (over three million), but are we against or indifferent to the idea of there being still more?
2006-10-08 20:00:56 · answer #2 · answered by voltaire 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The distribution or redistribution of the newly created wealth is the concern. And, of course, the definition attached thereto. Nonetheless, if one objectively looks at recent U S tax policy, one must conclude that the wealthiest among us have benefitted most. I think that is what Ms. P was talking about.
2006-10-08 19:40:46 · answer #3 · answered by homerunhitter 4 · 8⤊ 1⤋
on the Birthers, I believe you. As for the Tea occasion, I particular thank them. They helped us win the domicile and %. up 7 seats in the Senate. i'm anxiously looking forward to ascertain how lots they're going to help Conservatives win in 2012.
2016-10-19 01:45:53 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wealth is not infinite. There is a limited (or finite) money supply in the world. I didn't see the tv show you are talking about, but Republicans have certainly been doing that, through their idiotic tax reforms. Please explain where the money might come from to make you wealthy, if not from other people.
2006-10-08 19:40:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 2⤋
Wrong.
Sorry my friend, I udnerstand your point of view but the reality is any economist will tell you that ultimately economics are a representation of RESOURCES and resources, whether its oil, gold, plastic etc is FINITE. Some resources APPEAR infinite (harvestable trees that are replanted etc) becuase they depend on a resource that is very LARGE (the sun among them, water etc).
2006-10-08 20:00:03 · answer #6 · answered by mark r 3 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Wealth is made from the exploitation of natural resources, humans, animals, plants, trees, metals, ores, minerals, etc. These resources are finite, they will not last forever. At some point we will have to recycle them. Wealth is finite, and at some point it will have to be redistributed.
2006-10-08 19:36:42 · answer #7 · answered by sangheilizim 4 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Pelosi ought to now as she is one of the few.
2006-10-08 19:40:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why have the Republicans spent more money than anyone in our history.
How big is that defict again? Talk about no clue how to spend.
2006-10-08 19:36:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 2⤋
Thank you for pointing out the fact that nancy pelosi is as close to communist/libral/socialist politician as this nation has. Maybe the sun drunk californians will realize now the errors of their ways
2006-10-08 19:43:00 · answer #10 · answered by latitude58_8 2 · 2⤊ 5⤋