The mathematical law that shows why wealth flows to the 1%

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:38 am

One of the main issues raised by the Occupy demonstrators is the inequitable distribution of wealth. Their slogan focuses on the extreme difference between the richest and the poorest

Looks like it only a natural phenomenon........so what can be done ?

Post by **spot** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:01 am

Social engineering by way of taxation works perfectly well. There's wealth taxes, death taxes, progressive taxes on earned and unearned income, window taxes, you name it we can tax it.

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:32 am

Hmmm. This is only true if you believe true wealth is what can be termed as commodity. Money is just numbers and paper. It's worth is only what central banks says it is. Since gold and silver standards have been dropped, it is only paper. If monetary value could be placed on happiness...then I am on top of Forbes, mate!!

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:23 am

How some groups manage to accumulate more than others has been an issue for centuries. They don't live in isolation from the society around them and couldn't accumulate without the society around them progressive taxation is the way we deal with it nowadays. You redistribute amicably or you have social revolution and bloodshed with the 1% being stuck in front of a firing squad and then the cycle starts all over again. It's when they start to believe they are entitled to their wealth and actually earned it on their own they have a problem.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:03 am

spot;1377225 wrote: Social engineering by way of taxation works perfectly well. There's wealth taxes, death taxes, progressive taxes on earned and unearned income, window taxes, you name it we can tax it.

Does it ?

If you tax too harshly the people or institution finds another place with a better return for them.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:06 am

Raven;1377234 wrote: Hmmm. This is only true if you believe true wealth is what can be termed as commodity. Money is just numbers and paper. It's worth is only what central banks says it is. Since gold and silver standards have been dropped, it is only paper. If monetary value could be placed on happiness...then I am on top of Forbes, mate!!

It is a lovely thought..................but have you ever gone into M&S and tried to pay with 'happiness' ?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:15 am

gmc;1377247 wrote: How some groups manage to accumulate more than others has been an issue for centuries. They don't live in isolation from the society around them and couldn't accumulate without the society around them progressive taxation is the way we deal with it nowadays. You redistribute amicably or you have social revolution and bloodshed with the 1% being stuck in front of a firing squad and then the cycle starts all over again. It's when they start to believe they are entitled to their wealth and actually earned it on their own they have a problem.

That is what the article says, it happens in nature.

It said somewhere that 20% of the peapods held 80% of the peas, and such things as 20% of the people use 80% of the healthcare.

If it is a natural law, what can realistically done to make things fairer in the financial field ?

Post by **spot** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:23 am

Bruv;1377259 wrote: If it is a natural law, what can realistically done to make things fairer in the financial field ?
The collective ownership of the means of production, which can easily be achieved by State confiscation in the name of the proletariat.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:35 am

spot;1377260 wrote: The collective ownership of the means of production, which can easily be achieved by State confiscation in the name of the proletariat.

And to back up that argument, have you a working model we can refer to brother?

Post by **spot** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:46 am

Bruv;1377264 wrote: And to back up that argument, have you a working model we can refer to brother?

Owing to the treachery of Ramsey MacDonald, the redistribution of resources has so far been deferred. I think we've seen enough of the loadsamoney class enemy to realize that curtailing the sods is long overdue. The last time I checked, the Isle of Man had been earmarked for internment and re-education.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:19 pm

spot;1377269 wrote: Owing to the treachery of Ramsey MacDonald, the redistribution of resources has so far been deferred. I think we've seen enough of the loadsamoney class enemy to realize that curtailing the sods is long overdue. The last time I checked, the Isle of Man had been earmarked for internment and re-education.

And I thought your horizons were broader than that.

Post by **spot** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:46 pm

Bruv;1377276 wrote: And I thought your horizons were broader than that.

One must start somewhere, mustn't one.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:53 pm

spot;1377282 wrote: One must start somewhere, mustn't one.

A movement of one wont work unfortunately.

the grumps · Post by **the grumps** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:41 pm

ah yes the occupy london group

the great unwashed

layabout students and the beard and sandals brigade

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:54 pm

the grumps;1377294 wrote: ah yes the occupy london group

the great unwashed

layabout students and the beard and sandals brigade

Not a bit like the gullible twits like you that think all our woes are due to immigrants, people on benefits and single mothers.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:48 pm

the grumps;1377294 wrote: ah yes the occupy london group

the great unwashed

layabout students and the beard and sandals brigade

Beard and sandals ?

Jesus and his disciples you mean ?

Post by **spot** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:54 pm

"What would Jesus do" is apparently one of the questions which can't ever be asked in polite circles, when it comes to social justice.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:47 am

spot;1377309 wrote: "What would Jesus do" is apparently one of the questions which can't ever be asked in polite circles, when it comes to social justice.

That's because he was a dangerous radical with a down on money lenders.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:56 am

Here's my favorite line from the article:

The average height of the people in a room (following the normal distribution) might tell you a lot about the spread heights of people in that room, but the average wealth of a country's citizens (which follows a power law distribution) tells you little or nothing about how rich or poor most people are.

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:14 pm

Saw an interesting survivalist debate where one bloke insisted everyone should pull their money from banks and buy gold to survive the crash. Another rather cleverly pointed out that when food is being rationed no one wants hard yellow stuff that can't be eaten, he advised investing in cans of tuna and pantry full of food that won't go bad for a long time. I guess it's really an assessment of whether or not people will figure out that nothing has value unless they agree it has value. We could shrug off dollars in an instant if the population decided they didn't want them anymore.