General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRex
(65,616 posts)I'm shocked! That means there is still a lot of money to be stolen by Wall Street!
Bonx
(2,053 posts)I'll take capitalism, thanks.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)reminds me of the Iraq debate where war supporters framed it as a choice between
a) invade Iraq or b) do nothing
There are always a whole bunch of alternatives - capitalist ones. Here's a couple
1. consider capitalism in Switzerland. According to the CIA world fact book, in Switzerland the poorest 10% consumes 7.5% of the national income and the richest 10% has 19%. Compares very favorably to the USA where the poorest 10% only consumes 2% of the income and the richest 10% gets 30%.
2. consider capitalism in the American past. What I call the good old days - before Ronald Reagan.
In 1986, the top 1% got 11.3% of all income, and the bottom 50% got 16.7%
In 2006,. after 20+ years of Reaganomics, the top 1% got 22.1% while the bottom 50% only got 12.5% Seen in pie form here http://www.koch2congress.com/5.html
So there are alternatives to massive inequality besides "nothing for everybody".
Bonx
(2,053 posts)Which isn't in disagreement with what I posted.
because you implied that massively unequal distribution was the only alternative to - universal poverty.
Bonx
(2,053 posts)If you're really want to disagree with me.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)now I want pie........and I want more than 20%
deutsey
(20,166 posts)hfojvt
(37,573 posts)but I am happy to see the other 19% included as part of the problem.