A country like America with a social stability and a strong middle class produces a LOT more rich people than a country like Somalia.
The problem is what happens when the workers kill or drive away all the innovators, entrepreneurs and industrialists? Who will they work for? I’ve seen the inside of all sorts of companies. Just because the workers can run the machines does not mean they can run the business.
You sell products for a MLM company. Let’s not pretend that makes you are some sort of brilliant industrialist. MLM companies are at best one step away from a pyramid scheme. And IMHO, they are symptomatic of what is wrong with our economy. Whether it’s MLMs, real estate, CDOs, dot coms, day traders and so on, we just have too many people thinking they should be getting rich doing nothing but buying and selling imaginary wealth. Whenever some new idea becomes the Big Money Maker du jour everyone jumps into it artificially driving the demand up. Predictably, when the market can not longer sustain itself, it collapses in a speculative bubble.
And the reason you should care is that the more Americans who enjoy a higher standard of living, the more people you can sell your products to. Especially in your industry which essentially requires an infinitely expanding market to stay profitable.
These guys think the USA is in absolute, not relative, decline. Whether that’s true is a good question. Whether it’s a temporary phase is another good question.
I don’t agree. Not because of nationalistic ignorance but because I don’t think that is as much the case anymore.
During WW2 as an example, the Germans wanted to surrender to France, the UK and US but not to Russia for fear of how the Russians would treat them. The allies turned them down, but there is a distinction among wealthy OECD nations and authoritarian dictatorships.
We have supported tons of dictators. However I think most of that was during the cold war and even when we did we tried to use diplomatic pressure to encourage liberal democracy when possible. Pinochet supposedly stepped down because the Reagan administration sent someone (I forget who) to encourage him to hold another plebiscite. A lot of talk is made of the US’s role in supporting dictatorships in latin america in the 70s and 80s, but nobody mentions that starting in the 90s virtually all those nations transitioned to liberal democracy. I have no idea what role the US played in that transition either pro or con. But if we wanted dictatorships over liberal democracies, we didnt really fight for them.
When I was in college a group of activists born and raised in Myanmar were in the US talking about ethnic cleansing and human rights abuses. I asked what we as citizens could encourage the US gov. to do that it wasn’t already doing, and they told me the US was already doing a good job of putting pressure on Myanmar to improve its domestic human rights. You’d never hear that about China.
We aren’t perfect, but we are better than China wrt our human rights policies overseas. And like I said earlier, even politicians in South Korea who are normally very anti-US were privately telling Fareed Zakaria that they were worried the US would abandon them and let China and North Korea run roughshod over them.
That is why the wealthy must remember the principle of bread and circuses. The bees will continue to work if they have a minimal level of contentment, and are not starving. But today, the gap between the very wealthy, and everyone else, is widening at an unsustainable rate. Wages at the bottom have been stagnant for over a decade, and the natives are becoming restless. Capitalism is a wonderful system, but it has this fatal flaw; the only mechanism to limit unbridled avarice is revolution. That is why some measure of socialism is required to keep the balance; wealth redistribution is a necessary part of the mechanism. I know that is anathema to pure capitalism, but pure capitalism is flawed.
If the wealthy had the sense to be satisfied with the incredible abundance the system offered, it might be sustainable, but they have concluded they can continue to amass wealth at one end of the economy indefinitely and that simply is not so. The market is not magically self-adjusting, and insisting that is so will not prevent the workers from destroying the system; they don’t care if that drives away innovators, entrepreneurs and industrialists, they are as shortsighted as the wealthy in that regard.
The simple fact is some measure of wealth redistribution from the top to the bottom is required, and simple denial on ideological grounds alone will not prevent the wheels from falling off the cart when all the wealth ends up in one corner. It simply is not sustainable.
This comment is so bizarre, I’m not sure it is serious. Of course if you reside in a country, it is in your interest for it to be stable and prosperous. What you describe is essentially the third world. In the third world the wealthy spend a significant amount of their money to counter the decline of their society: they have to supplement their police with private security, they have to send their kids to private schools, and they have to worry about violence. Also the system you describe is very unstable, it is very easy for major disruptions to occurr to the social/political world. I’ve spent a lot of time in the third world and a lot of the elites have contingency plans in place to flee to stable prosperous societies if their home country becomes too unstable.
And whether it’s just Canadian wishful-schadenfreude gloating is another. 
But killing the dinosaurs wasn’t exactly an unmixed curse, you must admit.
Exactly. Which is why they’re doing just fine there. Mexico has been unstable for quite a while but do you hear of rich people being killed there very often? Sometimes but not often. The problem with instability mainly hurts the worker bees. Instability is not a problem… the rich know how to keep above the chaos.
Many of these unstable places have been unstable for years and haven’t ended in disaster for the rich. Third world nations can and do endure. They just don’t go well for the lower classes.
Correction: I sold such products. I’m retired, as I said before.
You’re preaching defeatism here. These jobs are in fact full of opportunity. Smart people know how to find it.
Even in a third world nation the innovative ones make money.
Yeah, uh huh. How often does that happen? I would bother myself to point out to you the history of peasant rebellions and their like. They don’t usually end in favor of the peasants. The poor usually get their asses kicked. The Soviet Union was an anomaly.
Hell, if the poor get out of hand the rich simply use tribalism to split them against each other. Black vs white vs Mexican, old vs young, Republican vs Democrat, they know how to keep the poor dis-united and at each other’s throats. Look at the Tea Party: that’s a prime example of how easy it is for the rich to manipulate the working class.
Remember how America wanted Wall Street’s head on platters in January of 2008, and now Wall Street is walking away with gazillions of dollars in bonuses and laughing in your face? The rich faced the poor head on and made them their bitches. Look at the tax cuts for the rich: they owned the poor again.
Worker bees have no chance.
Smartness has no connection with financial success. It’s luck, ruthlessness and who you know that matter. You can be a genius and work hard and still die poor. Or you can be a moron and die wealthy.
No, it’s America with its worship of the wealthy that is the anomaly. The common people, the “worker bees” as you sneer at them have largely won in much of the world.
No, that is just an example of how in America - as opposed to the rest of the world - the ordinary people have a willing slave mentality. Americans on the whole are cowards and grovelers.
These arguments assume that the nature of military power doesn’t change. Which has not historically been the case. There have been plenty of societies that thought they had an unbeatable military advantage but then found out that the definition of military power changed.
Look at the medieval kings who felt secure because they had a massive superiority in mounted knights - and who were then defeated by pikemen or longbowmen. Or the admirals who determined naval superiority by counting battleships - but who had no plan on how to defend against submarines or airplanes.
We could be in the same mindset. We are confident that China is not a threat to us because we have a huge lead in cutting-edge military technology and China is nowhere close to catching up with us in that field. But maybe China will figure out a means of bypassing our technological lead and making it irrelevant in determing who wins battles.
I honestly do not know.
I think we’re at a stalemate. It’s like all sides are waiting for a push or some kind of momentum. We need jobs, assess taxes (again), rebuild education, bridges, energy…
Employers need incentive to hire, economy needs incentive to rebuild trust, education needs incentive to grow, etc.
As far as what the incentives are for all this (and much more), you tell me. 
Of course not; it doeasn’t end well for anybody. That is my point.
When the rich pay high taxes and the government spends a lot on on infrastructure, the economy does well, and the rich get richer. Then the the rich begin thinking how much richer they could be if they just didn’t pay so much tax, and they exerting influence on politicians to lower taxes. Spending gets cut, and the economy tanks when the middle class spending engine shrinks and wealth accumulates at the top end. Taken to the extreme, the masses revolt, and everybody loses.
The wealthy do much better in periods of high taxes, but they think they can have it all, a booming economy and low taxes. There has never been such an economy, but hope springs eternal in their greedy little hearts. Read your history book.
Genius is relative. In fact, it’s more of a 3d thing. A real genius would know how to make the right friends. To succeed in door to door sales you HAVE to be a genius. Maybe it is not being a genius at math or biology, but in dealing with people.
Besides, if you are a genius in other areas there are plenty of other countries for you to go and make a living.
Really? Care to substantiate this?
Hence the rich will rule that country. Forever.
It ends well for the rich. The workers strike, the rich send out militias to put them down, the militias usually win, and replacement workers come in and fill the gaps. Life goes on. When was the last time anyone managed a successful revolt against the rich in Mexico?
Not as well as when they pay high taxes.
No, intelligence won’t help that. You need to be born to the right families, go to the right schools, be allowed in the right clubs. America is a plutocratic aristocracy. Intelligence is meaningless. Effort is meaningless. That’s why a lazy moron like Bush can become President; he had the right family, the right connections. He didn’t need to do anything besides keep breathing to prosper.
Excuse me. Someone selling things door to door is one of those very worker bees you despise.
Yes - something that’s known as a “brain drain”. Well educated people aren’t coming to live in America much any more.
Most of the world is socialist by American standards. We are the backwards ones these days.
No; America will more likely collapse because the situation is unsustainable. There won’t be an America “forever.”
Defeat.
Defeat!
DEFEAT! Surrender, all is lost!
30% of the rich today started out being not rich. So you’re wrong 30% of the time here.
Tell me something I didn’t know. The difference is I rose above that.
When I worked MLM, I decided hey, I wanted to buy some clothes. I’ll work harder and make more money. I gave myself a raise by busting my ass a little bit harder. If you sell 10 more Big Macs does McDonald’s give you a raise? No. I sold 10 more policies and investment accounts or recruited more agents and helped them make their sales and that gave me an instant raise. Instantly.
BTW when you look for work you are engaged in door to door sales. You knock on their door with a resume and sell your skills. It’s all the same damned thing.
And that’ll suck for you. Meanwhile the rich will just retreat to their enclaves.