Rich Guy: We Should Get More Votes Than Poor

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
I agree. I believe I am giving more to the poor than I am the rich. I don't hold a line on voting but I get tired of the belly aching about how bad rich people are. Most of them earned it or it was inherited but none of them has tried to keep me from making my own fortunes.
Spot on.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
The easiest fix is to repeal the 17th amendment. Then half of the legislature I think would be less beholden to both corporate and mass majority interests.
I could get down with that. Let it go back to where the state legislators elect Congress.
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
The reason people bitch about rich folks is because a lot of them, like Sam Walton's 6 or 7 kids, are worth 50+ billion fucking dollars apiece and the peeps working at Walmart have to be on fucking food stamps to eat.

Seriously, if you are worth 57 billion dollars, couldn't you and each of your siblings take a little cut and be worth maybe 45-50 billion so the people that work for your company maybe could have a little better life?
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
The reason people bitch about rich folks is because a lot of them, like Sam Walton's 6 or 7 kids, are worth 50+ billion fucking dollars apiece and the peeps working at Walmart have to be on fucking food stamps to eat.

Seriously, if you are worth 57 billion dollars, couldn't you and each of your siblings take a little cut and be worth maybe 45-50 billion so the people that work for your company maybe could have a little better life?
You believe in socialism. We get it.

Most on here and around the country do not.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
The reason people bitch about rich folks is because a lot of them, like Sam Walton's 6 or 7 kids, are worth 50+ billion fucking dollars apiece and the peeps working at Walmart have to be on fucking food stamps to eat.

Seriously, if you are worth 57 billion dollars, couldn't you and each of your siblings take a little cut and be worth maybe 45-50 billion so the people that work for your company maybe could have a little better life?
The problem is those jobs aren't worth more than that. They aren't meant to be family-sustaining positions. Hey, I want a job raking sand traps at my local golf course but they aren't gonna pay me more than $8 an hour either because you know what? At the end of the day, nobody needs a sand trap raked. They are only going to pay me based on what they calculate I am bringing profit to them, and that's based on, hey, we only need that sandtrap raked like, twice a day.

The cashier at Walmart isn't generating that company enough revenue more than what they are getting paid. If Walmart paid everyone more, the company might start losing money. This is a myth of wealth accumulation. Say I make 1 penny on every transaction, and I make that transaction a hundred million billion times. Well, I'm gonna have a lot of pennies, meaning a lot of money. But if I increase my costs just 2 cents, now I lose a penny on every transaction and I'm no longer profitable, and in the same number of transactions, I'd be staggeringly in debt. Walmart may be fantastically successful without being in a position to raise their costs tremendously, if they operate on razor thin profit margins.

You want more money? Add more value to your company.

Very few reasonably educated, reasonably motivated people can't figure out how to do that.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
The problem is those jobs aren't worth more than that. They aren't meant to be family-sustaining positions. Hey, I want a job raking sand traps at my local golf course but they aren't gonna pay me more than $8 an hour either because you know what? At the end of the day, nobody needs a sand trap raked. They are only going to pay me based on what they calculate I am bringing profit to them, and that's based on, hey, we only need that sandtrap raked like, twice a day.

The cashier at Walmart isn't generating that company enough revenue more than what they are getting paid. If Walmart paid everyone more, the company might start losing money. This is a myth of wealth accumulation. Say I make 1 penny on every transaction, and I make that transaction a hundred million billion times. Well, I'm gonna have a lot of pennies, meaning a lot of money. But if I increase my costs just 2 cents, now I lose a penny on every transaction and I'm no longer profitable, and in the same number of transactions, I'd be staggeringly in debt. Walmart may be fantastically successful without being in a position to raise their costs tremendously, if they operate on razor thin profit margins.

You want more money? Add more value to your company.

Very few reasonably educated, reasonably motivated people can't figure out how to do that.
^5 Smitty. Whether it's through college or years of hard work a comfortable living can be attained. I have a cousin that never took a single college course and is now the COO of a medium sized grocery store chain. He started as a sacker.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
The reason people bitch about rich folks is because a lot of them, like Sam Walton's 6 or 7 kids, are worth 50+ billion fucking dollars apiece and the peeps working at Walmart have to be on fucking food stamps to eat.

Seriously, if you are worth 57 billion dollars, couldn't you and each of your siblings take a little cut and be worth maybe 45-50 billion so the people that work for your company maybe could have a little better life?
The peeps are free to go out and make their own way.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
The peeps are free to go out and make their own way.
Do you have no heart?! Don't you see that the poor Burger King workers are victims in all of this? Don't you see that we are making them work there? Don't you see that they are still front line staff because they are oppressed?
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
The reason people bitch about rich folks is because a lot of them, like Sam Walton's 6 or 7 kids, are worth 50+ billion fucking dollars apiece and the peeps working at Walmart have to be on fucking food stamps to eat.

Seriously, if you are worth 57 billion dollars, couldn't you and each of your siblings take a little cut and be worth maybe 45-50 billion so the people that work for your company maybe could have a little better life?
It's supply and demand. There is a ton of people capable of working and not enough jobs. It allows business like Walmart to pay low wages. The only fix to that is to actually create more jobs so that the work force is more scarce. People that think raising the minimum wage will solve anything have no real understanding of economics. Don't be made at Walmart. Be made at the crappy economy that has been created by some horrendous policy decisions by the last two presidents.
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
Costco takes good care of their employees and are a much smaller company than Walmart.

They actually start you out at somewhere over $11 an hour and pay 90+% of your healthcare.

You can't tell me the greedy fucks at Walmart and other places couldn't do the same.
 

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
So you want to make liberty a privilege of convenience rather than a Constitutional right which no one can take away. Good to know. Are there any other anti-liberty, authoritarian values of yours that you wish to share?
The right to vote is already readily taken away by the government (felons, retards, children) and property qualifications post dated the constriction by decades.
 

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
Costco takes good care of their employees and are a much smaller company than Walmart.

They actually start you out at somewhere over $11 an hour and pay 90+% of your healthcare.

You can't tell me the greedy fucks at Walmart and other places couldn't do the same.
Maybe there is a reason they are a smaller company, half the walmarts means half the jobs. And it would not be hard to actually figure out how much it would hurt walmarts bottom line to raise wages, but why should they have too?
 

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
Seriously, if you are worth 57 billion dollars, couldn't you and each of your siblings take a little cut and be worth maybe 45-50 billion so the people that work for your company maybe could have a little better life?
I actually agree with this a 100%, that is how a person should act. But I don't want to see that publicly mandated. Let people have a right to live their lives. If you want to advocate societial pressure I am all for that, but government is only going to fuck up the creative process.
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
I actually agree with this a 100%, that is how a person should act. But I don't want to see that publicly mandated. Let people have a right to live their lives. If you want to advocate societial pressure I am all for that, but government is only going to fuck up the creative process.
I agree. The government shouldn't have to take anything. It is common fucking human decency to provide your workers a livable wage if you are worth fucking billions.

I guess I just don't get the I HAVE TO HAVE IT ALL mentality.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
Costco takes good care of their employees and are a much smaller company than Walmart.

They actually start you out at somewhere over $11 an hour and pay 90+% of your healthcare.

You can't tell me the greedy fucks at Walmart and other places couldn't do the same.
They should be able to get the high quality workers as well. It's the whole point of paying an employee more.

Of course no one goes to Walmart for the customer service so obviously the quality of their workforce doesn't matter much.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
The right to vote is already readily taken away by the government (felons, retards, children) and property qualifications post dated the constriction by decades.
The right to vote is not a pure exercise when it comes to presidential elections. There is the role of the electoral college after all. No one gets to vote for a president as a direct matter.
 

Plan9Misfit

Appreciate The Hate
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
5,836
The right to vote is already readily taken away by the government (felons, retards, children) and property qualifications post dated the constriction by decades.
So that qualifies the idea of pegging it to personal wealth? That exacerbates the problem. It doesn't improve it. And the government never took away a minor's right to vote because the Constitution outlines it as being 18 years old. In other words, adults have that right, not children. So I'm hard pressed to see how allowing a richer man more votes than another supports liberty. If anything, it removes it by directly placing power into the hands of the rich and removes all liberty from the middle class and below because they cannot afford to buy elections. Manipulating elections like that is no better than authoritarian dictatorships like Afghanistan which claim to have elections even though they are rigged and under the full control of a corrupt dictator.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
So that qualifies the idea of pegging it to personal wealth? That exacerbates the problem. It doesn't improve it. And the government never took away a minor's right to vote because the Constitution outlines it as being 18 years old. In other words, adults have that right, not children. So I'm hard pressed to see how allowing a richer man more votes than another supports liberty. If anything, it removes it by directly placing power into the hands of the rich and removes all liberty from the middle class and below because they cannot afford to buy elections. Manipulating elections like that is no better than authoritarian dictatorships like Afghanistan which claim to have elections even though they are rigged and under the full control of a corrupt dictator.
Oh I agree. I know what he was getting at but practically speaking it would never make sense. Still I understand the frustration with the fact that the poor have reached a tipping point where they heavily control the election and they don't care what is best for the economy. They care about what is best and easiest for themselves which is also dangerous. People that want all the government handouts are becoming a growing segment with a lot of voting power.
 
Top Bottom