Conservative Dog Whistle.

[LeadBolt]

Gratitude is also a more healthy quality than envy.

Envy is good. It motivates.

Envy that motivates people to work smarter to get ahead is good.

Envy that motivates moochers to elect looters to confiscate and redistribute wealth from producers, not so much.

[Chizzang]

My point that I was addressing from the original post I responded to was "risk" and how the wealthy have more risk so they get more reward... and I was responding to THAT POINT - I was stating first lets define what RISK actually is to a kid who grew up with 50 million in a trust fund...

I've got nothing against the American Wealthy
in fact I just made points in my posts ^ here that AZ and Clucky jumped all over
and rode them like they owned 'em they loved 'em so much

It's considered shameful to be born rich in America

But first lets define "risk" from the previous post
and lets define rich - I don't consider a big salary and a 5 thousand square foot home rich
and most of those guys are ABSOLUTELY self made

It's the ELITE Wealthy (Family Wealth)
Now lets talk about rich & risk

Your misguided belief that that vast (98%, I believe) majority of the ELITE wealthy aren't self made had already been disproven.

Disproven is not a word (thank you)

Disproved by whom exactly...
Forbes the same magazine that called Mitt a self made man

Ya... thanks for playing


Some easy reading for you
The Romney will win decisively article is my favorite (written by Steve Forbes himself)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes ... ecisively/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HI54UNI]

Just admit you pulled the 98% number out of your ass.

Here's a good liberal piece that says at 35% of the Forbes 400 didn't inherit any wealth. Another 22% inherited $1 million or less.

https://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/09/24-6

From the article:

Each year Forbes celebrates the billionaires who populate its 400 list as paragons of get-up-and-go. The latest list, according to Forbes itself, "instills confidence that the American dream is still very much alive." Of America's current 400 richest, says the magazine, 70 percent "made their fortunes entirely from scratch."

Forbes made the same observation last year, too, and most news outlets took that claim at face value. But United for a Fair Economy did not. The Boston-based group's analysts took the time to investigate the actual backgrounds of last year's Forbes 400. They released their findings on the same day Forbes released the new 2012 list.

The basic conclusion from these findings: Forbes is spinning "a misleading tale of what it takes to become wealthy in America." Most of the Forbes 400, like Mitt, have benefitted from a level of privilege unknown to the vast majority of Americans.

As commentator Jim Hightower has colorfully put it, most of our super rich were born on third base and think they hit a triple.

United for a Fair Economy extends this baseball analogy in its new Forbes 400 analysis. UFE defines as "born in the batter's box" those Forbes 400 rich who hail from poor to middle-class circumstances. Some had nothing growing up. Others had parents who ran small businesses.

About 95 percent of Americans, overall, currently live in these "batter's box" situations. Just over a third, 35 percent, of the Forbes 400 come from these backgrounds.

Just over 3 percent of the Forbes 400, United for a Fair Economy found, have left no good paper trail on their economic backgrounds. Of the over 60 percent remaining, all grew up in substantial privilege.

Those "born on first base" — in upper-class families, with inheritances up to $1 million — make up 22 percent of the 400. On "second base," from households wealthy enough to generate inheritances over $1 million, UFE found another 11.5 percent.

On "third base," with inherited wealth of more than $50 million, sits 7 percent of America's 400 richest. Last but not least, is the "born on home plate" crowd. These high-rollers, 21.25 percent of the total Forbes list, all inherited enough to "earn" their Forbes 400 status.

[Chizzang]

America's current 400 richest, says the magazine, 70 percent "made their fortunes entirely from scratch.

This ^ right here
I can - with total - confidence assure you is complete bullsh!t

Entirely from scratch good times

good times

It still mystifies me why we're so obsessed with pretending this myth is real
The "made it from scratch" myth / Republicans drink that up like breast milk

I love this thread (a lot) thank you
I still prefer the European attitude - its okay to be born filthy rich - just embrace it
We (however) won't stand for that in this country

[Baldy]

America's current 400 richest, says the magazine, 70 percent "made their fortunes entirely from scratch.

This ^ right here
I can - with total - confidence assure you is complete bullsh!t

Entirely from scratch good times

good times

It still mystifies me why we're so obsessed with pretending this myth is real
The "made it from scratch" myth / Republicans drink that up like breast milk

I love this thread (a lot) thank you
I still prefer the European attitude - its okay to be born filthy rich - just embrace it
We (however) won't stand for that in this country

Saying something "in complete confidence" without providing any proof is complete bullshit.

[CID1990]

America's current 400 richest, says the magazine, 70 percent "made their fortunes entirely from scratch.

This ^ right here
I can - with total - confidence assure you is complete bullsh!t

Entirely from scratch good times

good times

It still mystifies me why we're so obsessed with pretending this myth is real
The "made it from scratch" myth / Republicans drink that up like breast milk

I love this thread (a lot) thank you
I still prefer the European attitude - its okay to be born filthy rich - just embrace it
We (however) won't stand for that in this country

So the crux of what you are saying here- if I understand this correctly...

Is that the well known part of the "American Dream"... that part that clearly says that being able to set your children up in a situation better than the one you started with.. that's no longer the desirable thing to do?

I get that you are just pointing out that a lot of wealth is inherited and that people who inherited their wealth are not affected by calculations of risk the way it has been asserted...

But why would someone like Mitt Romney think it prudent to try to hide his inheritance? What's the motivation? I think it is because people spend too much time being angry at others' success or even the good fortune of a lucky birth than anything else.

Why do we even care? I lose no sleep over billionaires regardless of whether they earned or inherited their fortunes.

[kalm]

Envy is good. It motivates.

Envy that motivates people to work smarter to get ahead is good.

Envy that motivates moochers to elect looters to confiscate and redistribute wealth from producers, not so much.

So going way back to the opening of this thread, what's a greater threat to the middle class, big government or concentrated wealth?

Discuss.

[AZGrizFan]

Envy is good. It motivates.

Envy that motivates people to work smarter to get ahead is good.

Envy that motivates moochers to elect looters to confiscate and redistribute wealth from producers, not so much.

The first kind of envy you note is an endangered species.

[AZGrizFan]

This ^ right here
I can - with total - confidence assure you is complete bullsh!t

Entirely from scratch good times

good times

It still mystifies me why we're so obsessed with pretending this myth is real
The "made it from scratch" myth / Republicans drink that up like breast milk

I love this thread (a lot) thank you
I still prefer the European attitude - its okay to be born filthy rich - just embrace it
We (however) won't stand for that in this country

Saying something "in complete confidence" without providing any proof is complete bullshit.

He went to Harvard and he has complete confidence, Baldy. Really, what more could you want?

[HI54UNI]

Saying something "in complete confidence" without providing any proof is complete bullshit.

He went to Harvard and he has complete confidence, Baldy. Really, what more could you want?

He makes shit up all the time. At least this time he has come back when he gets called on it. Usually he disappears......

[Chizzang]

This ^ right here
I can - with total - confidence assure you is complete bullsh!t

Entirely from scratch good times

good times

It still mystifies me why we're so obsessed with pretending this myth is real
The "made it from scratch" myth / Republicans drink that up like breast milk

I love this thread (a lot) thank you
I still prefer the European attitude - its okay to be born filthy rich - just embrace it
We (however) won't stand for that in this country

So the crux of what you are saying here- if I understand this correctly...

Is that the well known part of the "American Dream"... that part that clearly says that being able to set your children up in a situation better than the one you started with.. that's no longer the desirable thing to do?

I get that you are just pointing out that a lot of wealth is inherited and that people who inherited their wealth are not affected by calculations of risk the way it has been asserted...

But why would someone like Mitt Romney think it prudent to try to hide his inheritance? What's the motivation? I think it is because people spend too much time being angry at others' success or even the good fortune of a lucky birth than anything else.

Why do we even care? I lose no sleep over billionaires regardless of whether they earned or inherited their fortunes.

Don't be ruining my thread side track A-hole
But you are correctly dissecting my troll:
We're a completely neurotic and widely polarized society when comes to money

How we feel about it
How we earn it (or get it)
Why it matters or doesn't
Who has it and who doesn't

There are so many unwritten rules about money in this country
and how a person feels about those rules (from that) we can tell that persons political leanings

my side track illuminates that schism

[AZGrizFan]

So the crux of what you are saying here- if I understand this correctly...

Is that the well known part of the "American Dream"... that part that clearly says that being able to set your children up in a situation better than the one you started with.. that's no longer the desirable thing to do?

I get that you are just pointing out that a lot of wealth is inherited and that people who inherited their wealth are not affected by calculations of risk the way it has been asserted...

But why would someone like Mitt Romney think it prudent to try to hide his inheritance? What's the motivation? I think it is because people spend too much time being angry at others' success or even the good fortune of a lucky birth than anything else.

Why do we even care? I lose no sleep over billionaires regardless of whether they earned or inherited their fortunes.

Don't be ruining my thread side track A-hole
But you are correctly dissecting my troll:
We're a completely neurotic and widely polarized society when comes to money

How we feel about it
How we earn it (or get it)
Why it matters or doesn't
Who has it and who doesn't

There are so many unwritten rules about money in this country
and how a person feels about those rules (from that) we can tell that persons political leanings

my side track illuminates that schism

Now it was just all a trolling exercise?

Dude. Just admit you were fucking WRONG. Man up.

[Chizzang]

Don't be ruining my thread side track A-hole
But you are correctly dissecting my troll:
We're a completely neurotic and widely polarized society when comes to money

How we feel about it
How we earn it (or get it)
Why it matters or doesn't
Who has it and who doesn't

There are so many unwritten rules about money in this country
and how a person feels about those rules (from that) we can tell that persons political leanings

my side track illuminates that schism

Now it was just all a trolling exercise?

Dude. Just admit you were fucking WRONG. Man up.

Do you even read my posts..?
You don't do you



Start at the first financial RISK post
Then move through them - at no point do I change my points or shift my attitude

Admit it - you do not read my posts

[AZGrizFan]

Do you even read my posts..?
You don't do you



Start at the first financial RISK post
Then move through them - at no point do I change my points or shift my attitude

Admit it - you do not read my posts

Your posts are among the most difficult to read. It's like trying to read Hunter S. Thompson.

[kalm]

Do you even read my posts..?
You don't do you



Start at the first financial RISK post
Then move through them - at no point do I change my points or shift my attitude

Admit it - you do not read my posts

Your posts are among the most difficult to read. It's like trying to read Hunter S. Thompson.

Thompson is an easy read...if you've read him....

[Grizalltheway]

Your posts are among the most difficult to read. It's like trying to read Hunter S. Thompson.

Thompson is an easy read...if you've read him....

Z ain't interested in books that don't involve pictures and/or coloring.

[AZGrizFan]

Thompson is an easy read...if you've read him....

Z ain't interested in books that don't involve pictures and/or coloring.

I've read three Thompson books. GFY.

[HI54UNI]

Chizzy backpedaling

[Chizzang]

Chizzy backpedaling

So obviously you're confused about the phrase "back pedaling"
So I'll explain: In this instance it would mean backing away from previous statements
And I am absolutely NOT backing away from anything I said on this thread
If you can point out where I am backing away I'll give you due credit

However:
What I think you're trying to say is that I don't agree with your articles or reference material
and yet I don't have any links or references of my own - if that is what you're saying then Yes

This:
Over 70% of the richest men in America started with ZERO dollars - straight up from scratch '
Yeah... well NOPE I don't buy it, not even for a second - and I don't care what article or where it came from

I'll go into longer detail if you're interested in why I don't care where the information comes from
And why I insist that it's complete fabrication - but until then suffice to re-read my posts if you're still confused (which I imagine you are)

[AZGrizFan]

Chizzy backpedaling

So obviously you're confused about the phrase "back pedaling"
So I'll explain: In this instance it would mean backing away from previous statements
And I am absolutely NOT backing away from anything I said on this thread
If you can point out where I am backing away I'll give you due credit

However:
What I think you're trying to say is that I don't agree with your articles or reference material
and yet I don't have any links or references of my own - if that is what you're saying then Yes

This:
Over 70% of the richest men in America started with ZERO dollars - straight up from scratch '
Yeah... well NOPE I don't buy it, not even for a second - and I don't care what article or where it came from

I'll go into longer detail if you're interested in why I don't care where the information comes from
And why I insist that it's complete fabrication - but until then suffice to re-read my posts if you're still confused (which I imagine you are)

So, you don't "believe", you're not "buying" it. But you pull stats out of your ass and just want us to believe on faith? How about that "longer detail" you mentioned....

[Chizzang]

So, you don't "believe", you're not "buying" it. But you pull stats out of your ass and just want us to believe on faith? How about that "longer detail" you mentioned....

Well lets I'll start with your Hero Mr. Forbes
The born rich spokes person and poster boy for (NOT) self-made men
Who spent a great deal of ink creating fiction about Mitt Romney
Namely that Mitt was a Self Made Millionaire... which Steve (Son of Malcolm)
has a really really bad habit of doing - making up elaborate fictional stories about how all of his buddies are self-made men



Then - just to top it off - and to reduce his credibility even further
he went on (and on) about how Mitt was going to pull a HUGE victory / A decisive victory
This is after Steve Forbes dwindled his family fortune down to near zilch and ran Forbes magazine into bankruptcy
(self made indeed)

The joke:
how did Steve Forbes make 5 million dollars
By inheriting 120 million (and in 30 years he had 5)

As I already mentioned (and all you guys jumped on like it was your observation)
American culture has a HUGE issue with being born rich - so I'll give you part II if you're still interested



And I'll give you a hint
It has nothing to do with how American elite wealthy got that way buy being HUGE Risk takers
But I will give Steve credit for his nice book on Flat Tax

[Baldy]

So, you don't "believe", you're not "buying" it. But you pull stats out of your ass and just want us to believe on faith? How about that "longer detail" you mentioned....

Well lets I'll start with your Hero Mr. Forbes
The born rich spokes person and poster boy for (NOT) self-made men
Who spent a great deal of ink creating fiction about Mitt Romney
Namely that Mitt was a Self Made Millionaire... which Steve (Son of Malcolm)
has a really really bad habit of doing - making up elaborate fictional stories about how all of his buddies are self-made men



Then - just to top it off - and to reduce his credibility even further
he went on (and on) about how Mitt was going to pull a HUGE victory / A decisive victory
This is after Steve Forbes dwindled his family fortune down to near zilch and ran Forbes magazine into bankruptcy
(self made indeed)

The joke:
how did Steve Forbes make 5 million dollars
By inheriting 120 million (and in 30 years he had 5)

As I already mentioned (and all you guys jumped on like it was your observation)
American culture has a HUGE issue with being born rich - so I'll give you part II if you're still interested



And I'll give you a hint
It has nothing to do with how American elite wealthy got that way buy being HUGE Risk takers
But I will give Steve credit for his nice book on Flat Tax

In other words.......you got nothing.