jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (56 posts)

Have you seen this article on the 1% and their spending?

  1. adjkp25 profile image91
    adjkp25posted 4 years ago

    Interesting article about what the 1% is doing with their money these days and what they think about tax increases on themselves.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fear-loat … 00847.html

    1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
      Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      They're saving to punish us all. They debilitate and then rehabilitate the economic system at whim, for their own benefit. They were challenged, and now they'll make us pay.

      1. Wesley Meacham profile image92
        Wesley Meachamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Having read the article from begininng to end I've found nothing that suggests any malicious intent. It does not appear to me that the people described in the article are trying to hurt anyone. Rather they are simply trying to ensure their on safety. There is nothing abnormal about this. You see the same basic behavior at all income levels. An article I read months ago described all Americans as spending less and saving more. The behaviors described in this article the same thiings that I would do if I were in their position... except for me it wouldn't be a change in behavior. I've saved money and acted like I didn't have any money from the day I started working.

        1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
          Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I also read the article from beginning to end. Frankly, the article isn't going to suggest that there is any malicious intent- they are discussing the attitudes of the respondents based on the answers to the questions they asked. Different questions would ultimately throw up different responses.

          There's a difference between ensuring your own safety and accepting huge bonuses for poor performance. I'm paraphrasing, but doesn't the article also suggest that 1% are aware that their actions are hurting society?

          1. Wesley Meacham profile image92
            Wesley Meachamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I think that if there was evidence of malicious intent the article would say so and the journalist who wrote it would have likely enjoyed saying as much. I know I would.

            I would agree with you on the issue of bonuses even though this isn't actually mentioned here. It may apply to these individuals but then again it may not.

            As to your question... It says that the 1% are aware that by not taking risks with their money they are not helping the economy and that this cautious attitude in theory does hurt society. So yes they are aware that their actions are hurting society. That doesn't mean that hurting society is their motivation or their intent.

            Of course you're also correct that different answers would yeild different results. In addition I'll even support your arguement for you... just because someone took the time to answer the questions doesn't mean that he answered them honestly. If he did answer them honestly that still doesn't mean that he answered them entirely. He may have omitted a few things from his responses. And by the same coin... it doesn't mean that they did omit anything.

            I do the same thing with my conservative friends who believe that Obama isn't actually a US citizen. Conspiracy theories are usually not true. I don't believe that there is a conspiracy here because there is really no motivation. If they intentionally hurt the economy they would also be hurting themselves. I just don't buy it.

            1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
              Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I would too, but if I wanted to be taken seriously I'd just report the facts (?) responses. And you're right, that statement does not *prove* that hurting society is their intent, but it doesn't necessarily discredit that argument either. We have no way of knowing for sure, so yes, it does come down to opinion and that's what I was giving (should have said IMHO)

              It wasn't an argument it was just an observation, and a question. It didn't really need substantiating by you or me. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that one respondent has been fairly frank  ""My savings rate has gone up and I'm not spending, which I realize is bad for the economy ... but I like having a wide moat around me so that nothing can bother me" He/she talks openly about self interest.

              I agree that the whole Obama birth certificate none sense is exactly that (IMHO) However, the basis of the claims are not rational. "He's a socialist who wants to destroy America." and there's no other logic or evidence to support this claim.

              On the other hand, if we ask ourselves whose needs might be served by weakening the economy? In the long term, how may the 1% benefit by hoarding their cash? Ultimately, who will be blamed for low growth? Are they really hurting themselves by sitting on their cash, despite the fact that it is already hurting the economy? And finally, how might the 1% benefit from a more banker/tax avoider friendly government?

              I guess it's just a matter of perspective rather than a conspiracy theory as such.

              1. Wesley Meacham profile image92
                Wesley Meachamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Most of these people think in terms of benefit/reward versus cost/risk. The conspiracy theory that they might try to purposly tank the economy assumes that they believe that they would survive such a crash. Wrecking an economy would be very messy work. They would actually stand to lose everything they have. If the economy did crash I don't think that their savings would do them that much good. (This of course is my own opinion, :-) )

                Unless it had already been converted to other currencies before the decline began. If you see all or most of the 1% suddenly convert the majority of their wealth into another currency like RMB then maybe something might be amiss.

                I don't recall where I read this, it might be in that article or another one, but I did recently read that about 60% of the most wealthy people in America believe that they should be paying more in taxes. For someone to say that it suggests to me that this person has a vested interest in the welfare of this society. (Though of course not saying it does not prove the opposite).

                1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
                  Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  The thing is though, they have survived a pretty rotten crash, have been bailed out and not been held to account (in any substantive way that is) I agree, there are wealthier people who do believe that they should make larger contributions to society/the economy. Nevertheless, when it comes to converting currency the 1%, or should I say some from the 1%, arn't that big on transparency. Do we really know what they are doing with their cash? I'm skeptical.

                  1. Wesley Meacham profile image92
                    Wesley Meachamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Nope... we sure don't know what they're doing with their cash, any more than they would know what I'm doing with mine.

                    As you've probably guessed, I'm skeptical too...

  2. Dame Scribe profile image61
    Dame Scribeposted 4 years ago

    They are probably uncomfortable with 'blame' being placed upon them by a angry people hmm

  3. Niteriter profile image80
    Niteriterposted 4 years ago

    Is this the beginning of the end for trickle-down economics? The incentives have been provided, the wealth has not trickled down.

    1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
      Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It keeps trickling up, and defying the laws of gravity. See, the 1% CAN work miracles.

      1. Niteriter profile image80
        Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        The real miracle will have occurred when the 1% begin to appreciate that people value trumps capital value.

        1. Josak profile image61
          Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Don't hold your breath.

          1. Niteriter profile image80
            Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I'm already blue in the face. (I love puns!)

        2. Hollie Thomas profile image61
          Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          They would have to have a) a conscience, which so far appears completely devoid. And b) a tangible experience of reality.Again, devoid.

          1. Niteriter profile image80
            Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            LOL, Hollie! Have you ever wondered how much we'd change if we suddenly found ourselves in the !%?

            1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
              Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Well, there's no likelihood of that happening anytime soon. big_smile I think that lot would bore me, to be honest. I'd prolly just get drunk at dinner parties, make a fool of myself and become an even bigger pain the ass than I already am.

              1. Niteriter profile image80
                Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                This comment removes all doubt that you and I are soul mates.

                1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
                  Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I'd be quite proud to be your soul mate, Niteriter.

                  1. Niteriter profile image80
                    Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    We'll have to be careful that Wizard doesn't find out. I think he/she/it might make trouble. There's an outside chance that he's a 1%-er infiltrating the ranks of the good people.

  4. Wizard Of Whimsy profile image60
    Wizard Of Whimsyposted 4 years ago

    http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6522249_f520.jpg

    This is Reagan talking about millionaire tax loopholes that Republicans seem to always forget . . .

    http://youtu.be/cgbJ-Fs1ikA

    Meanwhile . . .

    https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/384635_483983751621570_1309044627_n.jpg

    1. Niteriter profile image80
      Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Contradictions are not easy to recognize in the heat of knowing you're right.

  5. knolyourself profile image59
    knolyourselfposted 4 years ago

    Nonsense.

    1. Niteriter profile image80
      Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Nonsense is my specialty.

  6. knolyourself profile image59
    knolyourselfposted 4 years ago

    The liberal elite is the upper middle class. They are educated, read books and generally well off. For the right, the liberal elite are the malefactors substituted for all the sins of the corporate capitalists.

    1. Niteriter profile image80
      Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I like the way you positioned the word "malefactor". One of these days I just might apply to be one of those.

  7. knolyourself profile image59
    knolyourselfposted 4 years ago

    Probably the origin of Draco Malfoy in the Harry Potter series, I am guessing.

  8. Hollie Thomas profile image61
    Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago

    oh, ok. So the liberal elite are offenders because they read? I know you are saying that for the right they are the upper middle class, but are they really? Many poor people, and believe me I've been poor in my day, relatively speaking probably still am, also have an education. That doesn't make us upper anything. But middle class in the US is not the same as in the UK. I'm working class.

  9. Wizard Of Whimsy profile image60
    Wizard Of Whimsyposted 4 years ago

    Shake your booty kids and enjoy the battle with the prattle!

    http://home.comcast.net/~wizardofwhimsy/butts.gif

    1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
      Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Oh my gosh, who gave you that picture of me on the beach. big_smile

      1. Niteriter profile image80
        Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Hollie, you are a temptress at your core! LOL! And I told you we would draw Wizard out of hiding eventually.

        1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
          Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Indeed I am and  indeed you did.

          1. Niteriter profile image80
            Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            When you agree with me so often I totally lose my train of thought!

    2. Niteriter profile image80
      Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Wizard, I would say you have a way with words, except... you know.

  10. knolyourself profile image59
    knolyourselfposted 4 years ago

    "liberal elite are offenders because they read" The majority of any progressive capitalist society is lower middle class usually around 70%. These are the people the ruling classes have to control. So you give them enemies, millions if necessary as anybody and everybody but...

    1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
      Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Yes. Education=Danger. People who are unaware are so much easier to control, because they actually believe that they are free. People who read, a lot, from different sources- are a pain in the ass, because they keep doing that thing...critical thinking.

    2. Niteriter profile image80
      Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I won't speak for Hollie, but I understood her to say at the beginning of this discussion that the "liberal elite" is a phrase thrown around in a derogatory way by folks who have an opposing view. And I further think we were agreeing that a "liberal elite" doesn't exist in reality.

  11. Hollie Thomas profile image61
    Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago

    I actually don't believe that the liberal elite exist. I think the phrase has been coined by the upper echelons who feel a tad too challenged, so they create another scapegoat, a deflection, from the issues. Say liberal elite  enough times and parrots will repeat.

    1. Niteriter profile image80
      Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I didn't know I was a liberal until someone here in the forums accused me of being one. But now that I know what I am, I think I'll make a run for the "elite" section. Once I get there I'll go to work on the parrots!

      1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
        Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Me neither. In this country a liberal is.. not good. Let's just put it that way.

        1. Niteriter profile image80
          Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Do you think there are liberals in the 1%? Could Warren Buffet, for example, be labelled a liberal?

          1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
            Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            He's an odd one, me thinks. Backs Obama, schmoozes and invests in Koch enterprises. Barclays backs BO but puts three times as much money into Romney's campaign. They're hedge betters, me thinks. Opportunists, the ideology of self interest-nothing more. Not liberals, Republicans or anything in the centre.

            1. Niteriter profile image80
              Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I'd love to dig in to that one with you, but I'm being called away by "the real world". Could I catch up with you a little later, if not here then on another thread? I'm truly sorry to have to bale out like this.

              1. Hollie Thomas profile image61
                Hollie Thomasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Of course. It's 2.25am here and I'm knackered. So, goodnight Niteriter and catch up soon.

                1. Niteriter profile image80
                  Niteriterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  And a good night to you. Cheers.

  12. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    Why do people always talk about the 1% as if they are the ones responsible for everything bad in this country?

    There are a lot of people in that group. I have family and friends in that group, and they are good people.

    I just hate broad strokes, they always miss the point.

  13. adjkp25 profile image91
    adjkp25posted 4 years ago

    Wasn't near a computer this weekend to read up on the comments.

    My intent on sharing this was to show that the easy solutions out there to just give the folks in the 1% more so they can create jobs or whatever has flaws.

    Just like the article stated some of these folks are not spending their money creating jobs, that is the core flaw with this philosophy.  Just because you give them the extra resources it doesn't guarantee that these resources will actually be used, making the extra investment almost a dead end street.

 
working