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
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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).
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.
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...
Yes, I doubt you'll like this response, but I'd like to bet that they have a much better understanding of what you're doing with your cash, then you have of theirs.
You may have a point there.
Except that all of my cash is in RMB. I currently am not holding any dollars.
Other than the $10. I've made on HP....
You lucky person, I see you're living in China (I'm assuming of course that you like it there) China is definitely on my bucket list, a country I've always wanted to visit. I'm sure you'll make many more dollars on HP in the coming months.
They are probably uncomfortable with 'blame' being placed upon them by a angry people
Is this the beginning of the end for trickle-down economics? The incentives have been provided, the wealth has not trickled down.
It keeps trickling up, and defying the laws of gravity. See, the 1% CAN work miracles.
The real miracle will have occurred when the 1% begin to appreciate that people value trumps capital value.
They would have to have a) a conscience, which so far appears completely devoid. And b) a tangible experience of reality.Again, devoid.
LOL, Hollie! Have you ever wondered how much we'd change if we suddenly found ourselves in the !%?
Well, there's no likelihood of that happening anytime soon. 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.
This comment removes all doubt that you and I are soul mates.
I'd be quite proud to be your soul mate, Niteriter.
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.
Find that hard to believe, but perhaps that's because I'm arrogant? Wizard appears to bring forth reasoned, valid arguments (and pictures ) The 1% bring forth..emm, what's the word I'm looking for? Not reasoned, not valid? Just..emmm. help me out here.
My accusation of Wiz being in the 1% is to shake the shavings out of a new word I've been working on for a while - facetious. Besides, it usually provokes WIz into a frenzy that results in all those wonderful graphics he posts.
They are wonderful arn't they? Facetious, interesting, I've heard some posters on here like to refer to it as "the liberal elite" What does that mean, educated? Truly, I'm at a loss.
This is Reagan talking about millionaire tax loopholes that Republicans seem to always forget . . .
Meanwhile . . .
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.
Probably the origin of Draco Malfoy in the Harry Potter series, I am guessing.
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.
Shake your booty kids and enjoy the battle with the prattle!
Oh my gosh, who gave you that picture of me on the beach.
Hollie, you are a temptress at your core! LOL! And I told you we would draw Wizard out of hiding eventually.
Wizard, I would say you have a way with words, except... you know.
"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...
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.
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.
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.
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!
Me neither. In this country a liberal is.. not good. Let's just put it that way.
Do you think there are liberals in the 1%? Could Warren Buffet, for example, be labelled a liberal?
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.
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.
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.
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.
by marty1968 11 years ago
Topic: Difference Between Christianity and Religion Christianity is unique in the fact that it is the ONLY faith which is not a religion- as a 'religion'- by definition means "to be bound" by rules and regulations and rituals in order that one MAY attain salvation....
by Beth Perry 8 years ago
Have you seen the same Question posted and reposted by..the same person -with only slight variances to the phrasing of the question? I don't care if they do, but I find it amusing -if somewhat obsessive- when I see this kind of online behavior. When I have seen this happen the person asking the...
by Raymond D Choiniere 10 years ago
Hey Hubbers,This specifically affects U.S. citizens....Have you read this article on Yahoo?http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/ … e_strategy
by ga anderson 18 months ago
Federal Government Lost 5x More to COVID Stimulus Fraud Than It Spent on Vaccine Development, New Report Reveals[i]"When we finally have the full figures, total taxpayer money lost to fraud by the US federal government will likely be bigger than the entire economy of many small...
by James Smith 8 years ago
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 … 63786.htmlI heard a good argument against the raising the debt ceiling a few years back. This senator argued leadership means that ''the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children...
by danielthorne 12 years ago
Have you ever seen a ghost?
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|