
The 1 percent are parasites – debunking lies about trickle-down and capitalism - neuro_imager
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/11/the_1_percent_are_parasites_debunking_the_lies_about_free_enterprise_trickle_down_capitalism_and_celebrity_entrepreneurs/
======
_Codemonkeyism
Most of this is the top 10% using the 90% against the top 1% so the top 10%
can pay less taxes and have more power. Not that I'm against that, but the 90%
are just used for centuries by the fight of the top 10% and the top 1%.

~~~
geezerjay
> Most of this is the top 10% using the 90% against the top 1% so the top 10%
> can pay less taxes and have more power.

This.

I would also add that all this parlance sounds an awful lot like communist
propaganda, not in the message but on the power-grabbing strategy.

They've fabricated a common enemy (the 1%/the bourgeoisie) and in spite of all
the propaganda the only objective of the elites controlling these movements is
to manipulate useful idiots (90%/the proletariat) into doing all the dirty
work to transfer power away from an established rival to their own hands.

The tactics are the same, the propaganda is the same, the rhetoric is
essentially the same, etc etc etc.

------
B1FF_PSUVM
One thing that would bear looking into is the "star system" \- say you have a
pool of 1000 people very skilled at whatever (singing, acting, athletics, TV
talking, etc.).

Only a few get to be "stars" and reap most of the available rewards, although
they could be replaced by another pool member with minimal difference.

Until the XIX century, there was not enough communication reach for this to
occur noticeably. But now anyone from Podunk can have a global audience.

Is this a problem, and does it need fixed?

------
_Codemonkeyism
... also calling real humans 'parasites' says a lot about the thinking of the
author. Media should have learned where devaluing human life leads to.

------
ap3
>As we show later, governments have repeatedly fostered fundamental research
and borne the risk of ventures failing.

How do "governments" bear a risk when ventures fail?

------
berntb
First, I don't really know if the article's argument is correct, but the
vehemence in the "1%" discussion is bad. If nothing else, this movement should
concentrate more on rent seeking and regulatory capture.

Living in a part of the world with a bigger (non military) state, the state as
entrepreneurial is a cruel joke. E.g., the last few Swedish governments have
been systematically under investing in railway upkeep -- an improvement won't
be noticed until after the next election, so the governments do the "bread and
circuses" thing with the available resources instead, to win the next
election. (This works because they also use the resources to integrate with
the media and avoid too harsh criticism.)

But sure, the previous is arguably "entrepreneurial"... :-(

The examples of this abound for the whole of EU.

As another point: The world has seen a fast global increase in the work force.
That quite naturally stress the salaries and job markets in the "old world".
(This rise of poor countries is IMHO a good thing, even if it hits me and
other people like me.)

What I expected more of in the article: What works, considering international
benchmarking of different tax/education/etc systems?

