Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Yes, I used the word "leftist" matter-of-factly. What on earth gave you the idea that it was an insult?

"It doesn't mean we want strict equality, just basic decency."

No, it doesn't mean that. Because people who are not leftist also want that. The world is not made up of kind-hearted leftists and stone-cold fascists, you know.

"It simply means that we think CEO income jumping form 34 times average wages 30 years ago to 400 times today should not be taken as a good thing"

And neither does anybody else. However, only leftists think it's a BAD thing. And the reason for that is that most leftists have a collectivistic and hierarchical mindset and as a result wish only to have as few people people as possible that make more money then them.

The result is that you are concerned mostly about the rich. I personally care mostly about the poor. I couldn't bloody care less about how much a CEO makes. It's not interesting, the CEO can take care of himself. It's not my problem. What I care about is how the poorest of the world live, and how to improve that. I also care about how the state money is being used and how we can get good health care (as in France, and opposed to Sweden and Poland, for example) and things like that.

You only care about how high peoples incomes are, and to support that, you guys make up facts and alternate realities where freedom makes people poor. And when somebody comes and point out that this isn't in correlation with reality, you take your alternative reality and makes that person evil.

Because he has to be, right? Because he is challenging your preconcieved ideas? He sais your standpoint is wrong, and therefore, he challenges the authority and unity of your little cosy collective. And that, per definition is evil, right?

Because "truth" has nothing to do with reality for you guys. No, "truth" that's the collective. You are per definition right and the good guys, and therefore everybody that doens't agree with you must be the bad guys, right?

That fact that your politics have NEVER worked, EVER, no matter what shape or form they have been tried in, and that leftist policies only lead to poverty, that doesn't matter. Because you are right. Per definition. Like the Pope.

If you want debate (but I'm pretty sure you don't want it, you just want to sit here in your box and agree with each other) then you need to start listening and understanding, and trying to understand how the world actually works. And yes, that's painful, and yes that takes time and yes that takes energy.

It is without a doubt much more comfortable and easy to sit cosily and just agree with each other and prop up your own egos by slapping each others back and thinking "look everyone here agrees with me, we are so smart".

But do you want to be lazy and comfy, or do yo want to be right? Doo yo want to walk around in your mental box oozing righteous indignation over how horrible it is that the rest of the world doesn't behave like you want it too, or do you want to help improve it?

Because if you are happy being wrong as long as everybody else are, then there is no point for me to stay.

Over and out.

by freedomfighter on Sat Oct 27th, 2007 at 05:17:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

And neither does anybody else. However, only leftists think it's a BAD thing. And the reason for that is that most leftists have a collectivistic and hierarchical mindset and as a result wish only to have as few people people as possible that make more money then them.

That's where you have it wrong. We don't mind some inequality. We do mind when inequality is growing and incomes for those outside the top 1% are stagnating or declining.

We mind this gap:

And this one:

and this one:

and this one:

All of these show that the overall income is growing, sometimes quite strongly, but that growth is going ONLY to the very rich.

THAT's what we're fighting. The totally skewed sharing of the fruits of growth over the past 30 years - which is the direct result of the neo-liberal, "greed is good", "the poor have what they deserve", "screw society" ideology.

Runaway neoliberalism is what we're fighting. Not capitalism per se. In fact, regulated (or social-democratic) capitalism is what made our countries rich and built the middle class. But it's not what we have now.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Oct 27th, 2007 at 09:26:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"That's where you have it wrong. We don't mind some inequality. We do mind when inequality is growing"

Growing from what level?

As always, you care more about relative things than absolute things.

by freedomfighter on Sat Oct 27th, 2007 at 09:30:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

As always, you care more about relative things than absolute things.

That's what you really want to believe, but just look at the last graph I posted: the median wage is stagnating. There is no progress, in absolute terms (your own criteria) for the middle classes, despite fast growth.

So, according to your criteria (as long as the poor are better off, who cares how well the rich fare), the current system is a failure. It's not benefitting in any way to the vast majority of the population.

And the fact that people like you pretend that all is well ("GDP is growing! The economy is doing great!") does not go well with the  middle classes who see the rich getting extravagantly richer while they themselves are working ever harder just to stay put.

Incomes are not growing for the vast majority. You can spin that like you want it, it's bad under any criteria.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Oct 27th, 2007 at 10:53:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series