The Wealth Machine

I think its amusing you think Hilliary didn't have someone write a book for her......

she made her money selling herself as the Secretary of State, like Biden did selling the VP office.......
 
PoliTalker said:
Let's look at some basic logic.

Suppose an individual had the goal of becoming fabulously rich.

How would this be done?

Obviously, working for somebody else would not make that happen.

The individual would have to set up a 'Wealth Machine.'

That would usually mean building a system that collects some money from as many other individuals as possible.

It could be a little bit from a lot of people (Jeff Bezos.)

Or it could be a lot from selected individuals (The American Health Care System, where people have partial coverage and require expensive services.)

It would be detrimental to the function of The Wealth Machine to care about the concerns of the individuals affected by The Wealth Machine.

Individuals with partial coverage requiring expensive health care would then have to forfeit their life savings to The Wealth Machine.

Great for getting super-rich, not great for those affected.
Click to expand...

This is nether logic or correct. There are lots of ways to build wealth. One of the most commonly used is The time value of money. Another is Value of added labor.

Time value of money is you invest money for a period of time and it grows in amount due to return on investment. Value of added labor is you have some material and work on it to make it more valuable, then sell that material. You invest your time and labor into something to make it more valuable.

For most people this is the path to wealth. In many cases, it comes from generational investment and labor. They don't become wealthy overnight. Some lucky and talented individuals can do it in their lifetimes and even then, they work damn hard at it to make it happen.

The two scenarios, Left and Right, in that (loosely speaking) are thus:

On the non-Left, but we can say Right, a person has a family, owns property and material goods. They accumulate some wealth over their lifetime. Their children inherit that wealth and build on it. Over several generations, they accumulate enough wealth that they are now "wealthy." It takes foresight and planning to happen. You live for the long-term goal of your progeny being better off than you were. This means growing up, being adult, and taking responsibility for your life yourself.

On the Left, you live in "the now." You don't bother to accumulate wealth but rather strive to live a life of leisure and fun to the maximum extent that you can. You rent and lease, pay on credit, and leave little or nothing behind when you die. You want the government, or other entities, to coddle you cradle to grave. In essence, you want to remain a child for life. You want no long-term entanglements and progeny would only tie you down. You are in it for yourself and self-gratification. You take responsibility for nothing.
 
midcan5 said:
While I agree with thread OP there are some rich whose luck or whatever is put to positive use. An example would be medical research or supporting causes that do good but are not always supported. But many do less good things as greed is a powerful motivator. Two histories that cover the topic below.


https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2751831-invisible-hands

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27833494-dark-money


"The trick never ages; the illusion never wears off. Vote to stop abortion; receive a rollback in capital gains taxes. Vote to make our country strong again; receive deindustrialization. Vote to screw those politically correct college professors; receive electricity deregulation. Vote to get government off our backs; receive conglomeration and monopoly everywhere from media to meatpacking. Vote to stand tall against terrorists; receive Social Security privatization. Vote to strike a blow against elitism; receive a social order in which wealth is more concentrated than ever before in our lifetimes, in which workers have been stripped of power and CEOs are rewarded in a manner beyond imagining."

Thomas Frank, What's the Matter With Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America
Click to expand...

What's greedy about using YOUR money the way YOU choose to use it?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
This is nether logic or correct. There are lots of ways to build wealth. One of the most commonly used is The time value of money. Another is Value of added labor.

Time value of money is you invest money for a period of time and it grows in amount due to return on investment. Value of added labor is you have some material and work on it to make it more valuable, then sell that material. You invest your time and labor into something to make it more valuable.

For most people this is the path to wealth. In many cases, it comes from generational investment and labor. They don't become wealthy overnight. Some lucky and talented individuals can do it in their lifetimes and even then, they work damn hard at it to make it happen.

The two scenarios, Left and Right, in that (loosely speaking) are thus:

On the non-Left, but we can say Right, a person has a family, owns property and material goods. They accumulate some wealth over their lifetime. Their children inherit that wealth and build on it. Over several generations, they accumulate enough wealth that they are now "wealthy." It takes foresight and planning to happen. You live for the long-term goal of your progeny being better off than you were. This means growing up, being adult, and taking responsibility for your life yourself.

On the Left, you live in "the now." You don't bother to accumulate wealth but rather strive to live a life of leisure and fun to the maximum extent that you can. You rent and lease, pay on credit, and leave little or nothing behind when you die. You want the government, or other entities, to coddle you cradle to grave. In essence, you want to remain a child for life. You want no long-term entanglements and progeny would only tie you down. You are in it for yourself and self-gratification. You take responsibility for nothing.
Click to expand...

What a load of bullshit. Besides, most wealthy Americans are liberal. You think Bill Gates and Warren Buffet support Trump?
 
Hello T. A. Gardner,

T. A. Gardner said:
This is nether logic or correct. There are lots of ways to build wealth. One of the most commonly used is The time value of money. Another is Value of added labor.

Time value of money is you invest money for a period of time and it grows in amount due to return on investment. Value of added labor is you have some material and work on it to make it more valuable, then sell that material. You invest your time and labor into something to make it more valuable.

For most people this is the path to wealth. In many cases, it comes from generational investment and labor. They don't become wealthy overnight. Some lucky and talented individuals can do it in their lifetimes and even then, they work damn hard at it to make it happen.
Click to expand...

That's all fine and well, and I agree. Those are normal viable ways to build wealth. No doubt about it. Those are good ways for individuals and generations of individuals to become wealthy and rich. But those are not ways for an individual to become, and I quote, 'fabulously rich.'

T. A. Gardner said:
The two scenarios, Left and Right, in that (loosely speaking) are thus:

On the non-Left, but we can say Right, a person has a family, owns property and material goods. They accumulate some wealth over their lifetime. Their children inherit that wealth and build on it. Over several generations, they accumulate enough wealth that they are now "wealthy." It takes foresight and planning to happen. You live for the long-term goal of your progeny being better off than you were. This means growing up, being adult, and taking responsibility for your life yourself.

On the Left, you live in "the now." You don't bother to accumulate wealth but rather strive to live a life of leisure and fun to the maximum extent that you can. You rent and lease, pay on credit, and leave little or nothing behind when you die. You want the government, or other entities, to coddle you cradle to grave. In essence, you want to remain a child for life. You want no long-term entanglements and progeny would only tie you down. You are in it for yourself and self-gratification. You take responsibility for nothing.
Click to expand...

Well, thanks for sharing how you view the left and the right. Naturally I disagree. I do not share your view.

I am quite certain there are people on the right who do not have a job, live off government hand-outs, make nothing useful out of their lives, and save no wealth to pass on.

And I am just as certain that there are people on the left who work very hard every day, take few holidays or sick days, save up, get a mortgage, work their lives away, pay off a house, raise children, leave something to them, contribute to society, pay their taxes and also strive to have each generation do better than the last.

Stereotypes are usually a mistake.
 
Michael_Panetta said:
What a load of bullshit. Besides, most wealthy Americans are liberal. You think Bill Gates and Warren Buffet support Trump?
Click to expand...

Why aren't all those wealthy liberals that claim to care so much about the "less fortunate" giving them their personal fortunes instead of supporting forcing someone else to do it? Just like a left winger to claim to care then try to show it by having someone else foot the bill.

Do you care about the homeless? Do you care about the people that go hungry? Do you care about people without healthcare coverage?
 
CFM said:
Why aren't all those wealthy liberals that claim to care so much about the "less fortunate" giving them their personal fortunes instead of supporting forcing someone else to do it? Just like a left winger to claim to care then try to show it by having someone else foot the bill.

Do you care about the homeless? Do you care about the people that go hungry? Do you care about people without healthcare coverage?
Click to expand...

I care as much as the next guy, but what does that have to do with anything? Why do conservatives who claim to care about the poor and who believe that charity trumps government welfare donate so little? How much has Trump donated to charity?
 
Michael_Panetta said:
I care as much as the next guy, but what does that have to do with anything? Why do conservatives who claim to care about the poor and who believe that charity trumps government welfare donate so little? How much has Trump donated to charity?
Click to expand...

If liberals truly cared as much about those and other similar situations where people did without what you lefties claimed they should have, there wouldn't be any homelessness, lack of healthcare coverage, hungry people, etc. You would have personally pooled your money together years ago and alleviated all that.

You stated the difference between how left wing bleeding hearts view things and how conservatives view things without knowing it.

Conservatives don't donate too little. Why would you say that? How do you have the ability to determine whether or not someone else has given enough of his/her own money?

It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to provide to someone what he/she is unwilling to provide him/herself. It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to feed someone else's kid. It's their parents responsibility. It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to make sure someone has healthcare coverage, a place to live, clothes on their back, etc. It's that person's responsibility. The sooner you lefties realize that the taxpayer's aren't an ATM, the better off everyone will be.
 
Michael_Panetta said:
What a load of bullshit. Besides, most wealthy Americans are liberal. You think Bill Gates and Warren Buffet support Trump?
Click to expand...

Actually, you are wrong. Wealthy Americans who are liberal receive more attention in the media, that's all.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/09/13/2016-party-identification-detailed-tables/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/katias...milies-republicans-or-democrats/#21cf3bc73e83

Wealthy Americans-- Those earning above the median income, tend overall to be slightly more conservative and Republican. On the other hand, those that are well below the median income are far more likely to be Democrats and Leftist.

On other factors, men and Whites tend to be more Conservative while minorities and single women tend to be more Liberal.

So, once again, you are wrong.
 
midcan5 said:
While I agree with thread OP there are some rich whose luck or whatever is put to positive use. An example would be medical research or supporting causes that do good but are not always supported. But many do less good things as greed is a powerful motivator. Two histories that cover the topic below.


https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2751831-invisible-hands

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27833494-dark-money


"The trick never ages; the illusion never wears off. Vote to stop abortion; receive a rollback in capital gains taxes. Vote to make our country strong again; receive deindustrialization. Vote to screw those politically correct college professors; receive electricity deregulation. Vote to get government off our backs; receive conglomeration and monopoly everywhere from media to meatpacking. Vote to stand tall against terrorists; receive Social Security privatization. Vote to strike a blow against elitism; receive a social order in which wealth is more concentrated than ever before in our lifetimes, in which workers have been stripped of power and CEOs are rewarded in a manner beyond imagining."

Thomas Frank, What's the Matter With Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America
Click to expand...

Fuck off leftist. In the end, you don't want to work, and have us be your slaves so you don't have to work. Piece of Shit!

The reason you're a leftist shill making peanuts is because you don't want to work.

I make what you make in a week or maybe 2 in a day. And then some!

Go get a job, bitchboi.
 
Last edited:
PoliTalker said:
Let's look at some basic logic.

Suppose an individual had the goal of becoming fabulously rich.

How would this be done?

Obviously, working for somebody else would not make that happen.

The individual would have to set up a 'Wealth Machine.'

That would usually mean building a system that collects some money from as many other individuals as possible.

It could be a little bit from a lot of people (Jeff Bezos.)

Or it could be a lot from selected individuals (The American Health Care System, where people have partial coverage and require expensive services.)

It would be detrimental to the function of The Wealth Machine to care about the concerns of the individuals affected by The Wealth Machine.

Individuals with partial coverage requiring expensive health care would then have to forfeit their life savings to The Wealth Machine.

Great for getting super-rich, not great for those affected.
Click to expand...


The health care system should not be a for profit system. Health insurance is a scam.
 
CFM said:
If liberals truly cared as much about those and other similar situations where people did without what you lefties claimed they should have, there wouldn't be any homelessness, lack of healthcare coverage, hungry people, etc. You would have personally pooled your money together years ago and alleviated all that.

You stated the difference between how left wing bleeding hearts view things and how conservatives view things without knowing it.

Conservatives don't donate too little. Why would you say that? How do you have the ability to determine whether or not someone else has given enough of his/her own money?

It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to provide to someone what he/she is unwilling to provide him/herself. It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to feed someone else's kid. It's their parents responsibility. It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to make sure someone has healthcare coverage, a place to live, clothes on their back, etc. It's that person's responsibility. The sooner you lefties realize that the taxpayer's aren't an ATM, the better off everyone will be.
Click to expand...

We try to help people through government programs but you constantly fight us.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Actually, you are wrong. Wealthy Americans who are liberal receive more attention in the media, that's all.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/09/13/2016-party-identification-detailed-tables/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/katias...milies-republicans-or-democrats/#21cf3bc73e83

Wealthy Americans-- Those earning above the median income, tend overall to be slightly more conservative and Republican. On the other hand, those that are well below the median income are far more likely to be Democrats and Leftist.

On other factors, men and Whites tend to be more Conservative while minorities and single women tend to be more Liberal.

So, once again, you are wrong.
Click to expand...

So you define "wealthy" as anyone above the median? Weird.
 
Michael_Panetta said:
We try to help people through government programs but you constantly fight us.
Click to expand...

You've proven exactly what I said about you bleeding hearts. Claim to care then refuse to personally fund what you support.

It's not my responsibility to help fund those things for anyone. If you feel it's yours, it can be done without the government being involved if you actually cared as much as you claim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top