Published: Friday, Jan. 24 2014 8:30 p.m. MST
This proves more than ever before that it takes money to make money. In-spite of what some people will claim after reading this article, capitalism
is still the best system in the world for allowing people to pull themselves out
of poverty and move up the economic latter. It provides incentive. Socialism and
communism do not.People who accomplish a lot should be admired, not
envied. There are many people in the world who have the opportunities to
accomplish a lot more economically but choose not to, usually due to lack of
ambition. Unfortunately, there are far too many people who currently live
under oppressive governments that don't allow those same opportunities. There's a reason so many people are still literally risking their
lives to try to get to the USA and enjoy our freedoms and economic opportunities
that comparatively few other countries in the world offer. We in America are
very fortunate indeed.
Well said Tators! Spot on.
And just as those poor people are not making the rich people rich, the rich
people are not making the poor people poor. I have the same
opportunities whether Mitt Romney makes 1 million, 10 million, or 100 million
this year.He created value and deserves what he has. Its a sign of laziness when people think they deserve what others have earned.
And if you are worth more than what your current company is paying,
there obviously will be another company who will pay you more if you will
increase the value of their company.
@Tators"In-spite of what some people will claim after reading this
article, capitalism is still the best system in the world for allowing people to
pull themselves out of poverty and move up the economic latter. "Try explaining that to the 3.5 billion people whose combined wealth add up to
that of the 85 richest. Unfettered capitalism is what leads to exploitation of
cheap labor. I'm not saying that communism is correct (I don't believe
it is), I'm just saying that capitalism still needs some controls if you
really want to lift people up. That's why we have workplace safety
standards, the 40 hour workweek, the minimum wage...
Capitalism works every time it is tried. Because there are so many Countries
that are ruled by a dictator, capitalism does not have a chance to work. And
unfortunately, the USA supports many of these Countries with foreign aid that
only goes to enrich the dictator, while the rest of that countries population
starves.Support capitalism, and watch the entire population of the
Schnee.....Try explaining that to the 3.5 billion people whose combined wealth
add up to that of the 85 Richest? TWO WORDS: COMMUNIST CHINA! You
cannot be rich if your government steals all your hard work......something you
and Obama will never understand! That is why we have 37% of America not
working, because of Obama and his communist policies!
Right on Tators! @Schnee: "I'm just saying that capitalism
still needs some controls if you really want to lift people up". Problem is
when you give people free stuff that they didn't work for they become lazy
and dependent. Capitalism is not perfect but it's the best we've got.
With all the money spent in fighting poverty, especially under this Community
Organizer, it gets much worse.
I sure hope that Tators and Christopher B don't really believe that the US
is operating under real capitalism. The oil industry, mining and industrial
farms have been subsidized for decades. Educated workers are provided to
"capitalists" for free by a socialist education system. Goods are
transported on roads built by a socialist system. Business is subsidized at
every turn in the US. Mining companies pay next to nothing to extract wealth
from public lands.The rich have purchased congressmen (and women) in
a market that the rest of us can't participate in.Capitalist
talking heads fight a decent minimum wage and yet revel in obscene pay for a
limited few. Jamie Dimon gets a raise to $20M and Rush Limbaugh rakes in $28M a
year and we won't pay $15/hour as a basic wage.
This article is about net worth, not income. They are different. Net worth is
seldom cash sitting idly in a vault. It's deployed capital. It's not
yachts and private jets, it's business asset ownership. This working
capital employs and serves us all. Secondly, there is no mention of how the
wealth is used. Much of that (evil) wealth may be used for charity or
humanitarian service. Articles like this are technically true but intentionally
misleading, and have the main purpose of incitement towards a specific political
That's about as significant as saying that all the stars in the universe
have a million times more mass (or whatever) than all the planets combined, or
that the redwood forest has more mass than similar sized white pine forests.So what? That statistic doesn't really mean anything.
In developed and less corrupt nations at least, the rich do not take money from
the poor. I wish that idea would sink in.
The article I am reading says:"The 85 richest people in the world own
more wealth than the 300 billion poorest people combined"How many
planets' populations are they counting to get to 300 billion people?Have other advanced alien races not discovered some economic and political
system that keeps their billions of people from being so poor?
@ Christopher B,Actually, if Mitt makes $100M, your opportunities
might indeed increase.Guys like that didn't get rich by squirreling
away their coin in a bank vault like Scrooge McDuck. They put it to work by
putting other people to work.And with a small portion of it they
spend it on a lifestyle that is putting a bunch more people to work and putting
food on their table.And with a substantial portion of it, guys like
Mitt R and Warren B and Bill G lift a lot of people who need a lift.Money is just a tool that works best in the hands of someone who knows how to
use it to build things the rest of us need. Take it away and give it to someone
who doesn't know what to do with it, and we all become poorer.
"The 85 richest people in the world own more wealth than the 300 billion
poorest people combined". Interesting article, but maybe we need to check
the math. I believe the world's total population is about 7 billion, which
would not allow for 300 billion poorest people. Of course, the point of the
article would be the same if there were only 3.5 billion people in the
world's poorest half.
@t702"Problem is when you give people free stuff that they didn't
work for they become lazy and dependent. "But I'm not
talking about free stuff. I mean more basic things we take for granted like how
people in other nations are getting paid pennies an hour working in some
sweatshop. There's a difference between lazy and exploited. @TRUTH"You cannot be rich if your government steals all your hard
work"Nobody is saying to do that (and besides, I'd be
modeling a nation like Sweden that has less income inequality than the US, not
China which has more income inequality than the US)."That is why
we have 37% of America not working"You're either including
stay at home parents or 80+ year olds in that number... maybe both. I'm
sure you think families ideally should have one parent staying at home raising
the kids, and I'm sure you want to retire before 80 so why count all them?
@Thinkin' Man"In developed and less corrupt nations
at least, the rich do not take money from the poor. "They take
the labor of their employees and control how much the workers gets of the
Even if those 85 did not have that money the poor would still be poor.The poor aren't poor because someone else is rich.The left
makes a grave mistake thinking in such simple terms.
Clearly, each of those 85 richest people must do as much work and create more
value than 10 million of the world's poor. Right?
The fact that anyone can defend the udder greed is astounding. Greed is a
horrible, horrible human trait. Anyone who believes that it's ok for 85
people to own more money than 3.5 Billion people is beyond reason.
I'm sure Jesus would be so pleased.
I have enjoyed many of the seemingly intelligent comments on this blog. Could
any of you recommend some good books or other sources that would back up your
viewpoints or help satisfy my desire to better understand how economies work?
The vast majority in the "enclave" seem to feel unfettered capitalism is
grand. Seems like several scripture in the BoM would say otherwise: 4Ne1:3
comes to mind. And the outcome of a "united order" society? See verse
4 (continual peace). And how did it end? People beginning to separate into
classes based on their "ability" to obtain riches. More to the point:
What they did with that ability.We seem to complain about the poor
who do not wear the garment of the laborer, but the rich (I dare say all of the
85 in this piece) do not earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow.
Food, shelter and clothing are basic human needs. We collectively determine
whether these "needs" are rights or privileges. If a privilege, then we
expect the user to abide by certain rules. If a right, we grant it to the user
unconditionally. Delegation of the task of enforcing the rights we grant is
done by the government through taxation. Leaving it to philanthropic urges has,
at least if the 85/3.5B is valid is that the rich seem incapable, in the
aggregate, of doing it on their own. Welcome to the last days
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments